Studies in Sound Symbolism

GOTHENBURG MONOGRAPHS IN LINGUISTICS 17
Studies in
Sound Symbolism
Åsa Abelin
Doctoral Dissertation
publicly defended in Stora Hörsalen,
Humanisten, Göteborg University,
on May 14, 1999, at 10.00
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Department of Linguistics, Göteborg University, Sweden, 1999
ABSTRACT
This thesis investigates how the Swedish lexicon is structured with
respect to sound symbolism, the productivity of phonesthemes and cross
language similarities in certain areas of sound symbolism.
The Swedish lexicon has been analyzed with emphasis on the sound
symbolic properties of initial and final consonant clusters, and to a
certain extent of vowels. Approximately 1, 000 lexemes were judged to
be sound symbolic and the outcome of the analysis are tentative
phonesthemes, i.e. motivated connections between meanings and
consonant clusters.
Almost all Swedish initial consonant clusters and many of the final
consonant clusters can carry sound symbolic meanings. Lexically
infrequent clusters are utilized to a larger extent than lexically frequent
clusters. No two consonant clusters have exactly the same semantic
profile. Phonesthemes have different sound symbolic strength, i.e. some
are clearly sound symbolic (i.e. a high percentage of the words
beginning with a certain cluster are sound symbolic), and carry either
one meaning or several meanings. Other (candidates for) phonesthemes
are weaker and not so clearly sound symbolic.
The meanings of most phonesthemes are relatable to the senses:
hearing, vision or tactile sensation, or they are metaphorically or
metonymically connected to the senses. The most common semantic
features occurring are often relatable to synaesthesia.
The productivity of phonesthemes was tested in experiments of
production and understanding. The experiments show, for
interpretation, that no constructed word is interpreted as expected by
all subjects, but that all of the constructed words are interpreted
correctly by some subjects. The most common semantic features found
in the lexical analysis are often also the most successfully interpreted by
subjects. For production, the experiments indicate that subjects tend to
encode the semantic features in initial clusters rather than in final
clusters. Final consonant clusters seem to be of less importance than the
initial clusters in new sound symbolic words in Swedish.
For the contrastive studies, the general results are that there are both
similarities and dissimilarities between the expressions in the different
languages. The variation is greater for some semantic fields than for
others.
KEY WORDS: sound symbolism, lexical structure, synaesthesia,
productivity, universals
Acknowledgements
The first idea to write this thesis emerged when I was working in the
Lexical Database and Svensk Ordbok project at Språkdata in the 1980's,
where I alphabetically plowed through large parts of the Swedish
vocabulary.
My greatest thanks goes to my supervisor Jens Allwood, for always
supporting me and for being so consistent in always misunderstanding
what is not perfectly clear. I am also grateful to Elisabeth Ahlsén who has
given me many valuable comments and especially encouraged my
experimenting.
I also want to thank all my colleagues and former colleagues at the
linguistics department, especially Sally Boyd, Beatrice Dorriots, Johan
Hagman, Jerker Järborg, Per Lindblad, Lars Malmsten, Kerstin Nelfelt,
Shirley Nicholson, Joakim Nivre, Sören Sjöström, Sven Strömqvist,
Nicole Takolander, Hans Vappula, Åsa Wengelin, Ulla Veres, and all
others who have helped me in various ways over the years. A special
thanks goes to Catherine Paterson who did the cover design.
I also want to express my gratitude to my informants from many parts of
the world.
The persons who I want to thank especially are my children Tove and
Ellen who are for sure very tired of the word "avhandling". They have
shown great patience with my intermittent absentmindedness, but they
have also shown great interest in the subject of this thesis and given me
interesting comments from their point of view. Finally I want to thank my
family, my mother and father, my sisters Ulla and Susanne and all my
other friends.
Göteborg in April, 2000
Åsa Abelin
Contents
Chapter 0
Introduction
1
Chapter 1
Background
3
Chapter 2
Theoretical framework
49
Chapter 3
Method
71
Chapter 4
Analysis of initial consonant clusters
77
Chapter 5
Analysis of final consonant clusters, vowels and
combinations.
143
Chapter 6
Some contrastive studies in sound symbolism
189
Chapter 7
Experiments with words constructed from phonesthemes
219
Chapter 8
Summary and discussion
245
Bibliography
273
Appendix 1: Sound symbolic roots of initial clusters
Appendix 2: Interjections of cross language study
Appendix 3: Test sheets of chapter 7
Studies in Sound symbolism
0
1
Introduction
Background
1.1
Purpose of the chapter
1.2
Terminology
1.2.1 Onomatopoeia
1.2.2 Sound symbolism
1.2.3 Phonestheme
1.2.4 Ideophone
1.2.5 Morpheme
1.2.6 Conclusion
1.3
Is sound symbolism the rule or the exception in
language?
1.3.1 Sound symbolism is an exception
1.3.2 Symbolism is fundamental to language
1.3.3 Sound symbolism is both inside and outside of
language
1.3.4 Evaluation of discussion of sound symbolism
1.4
Is sound symbolism productive or not?
1.4.1 Sound symbolism is not productive
1.4.2 Sound symbolism is productive
1.4.3 Greater or lesser degree of productivity
1.4.4 Evaluation of the discussion of productivity
1.5
The question of etymology
1.6
The phylogenesis of language
1.7
Universality versus language specificity
1.7.1 Sound symbolism is universal
1.7.2 Symbolism is not universal
1.7.3 Evaluation of the discussion of universality
versus language specificity in sound symbolism
1.8
Context
1.9
A framework for models of sound symbolism
1.10
Expression and content of sound symbolism
1.10.1 Expression
1
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
5
8
9
9
9
11
12
12
12
13
13
13
14
18
20
20
21
22
23
26
28
29
2
3
4
1.10.2 Content
1.10.3 Expression and content in different analyses
1.10.4 Results - data from different authors
1.10.5 Experimental results
1.11
Possible explanations of sound symbolism
1.11.1 Miscellaneous explanations and proprioception
1.11.2 Synaesthesia
1.11.3 Other neurological and biological explanations
1.11.4 Non- biological explanations
Theoretical framework
2.1
General considerations
2.2
Static-dynamic, conventionality and
arbitrariness
2.3
Semantic analysis
2.3.1 Conceptions of meaning
2.3.2 Semantic features and semantic fields
2.4
Basic relations between expression and content
2.5
The nature of phonesthemes
2.6
Considerations for a model
2.6.1 Relations between the categories
2.6.2 An explanatory model for sound symbolism
Method
3.1
Stage 1: Collection of lexical material
3.2
Stage 2: Cross-language comparisons
3.2.1 Cross-language thesaurus studies
3.2.2 Cross-language informant studies
3.3
Stage 3: Experiments
3.3.1 Experiments with neologisms
3.4
Further method
Analysis of the initial consonant clusters
4.1
Data analysis, a short overview
4.2
Results
4.2.1 More and less sound symbolic clusters
4.2.2 Proportions of motivated root morphemes. Summary
4.2.3 Types of meaning
29
29
31
37
41
41
42
44
46
49
49
49
51
51
52
54
57
59
63
66
71
71
74
74
74
76
76
76
77
77
80
80
86
88
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
Frequent semantic features
93
4.3.1 Pejorative
93
4.3.2 Sound
100
4.3.3 Long thin form
105
4.3.4 Quick or strong movement
107
4.3.5 Wetness
111
4.3.6 The most sound symbolic clusters
115
Frequent clusters
116
4.4.1 The cluster sl118
4.4.2 The cluster sn119
4.4.3 The cluster kn121
4.4.4 The cluster kr124
4.4.5 The cluster fn126
4.4.6 The cluster kn127
4.4.7 The cluster gn127
4.4.8 The cluster spr129
4.4.9 The cluster pj130
Typical or unique meanings
131
Patterns of semantic features
134
Discussion and conclusions
140
Analysis of final consonant clusters, vowels and
combinations
143
Final clusters
144
Summary of the analysis of semantic features for
final clusters
150
Properties of consonant clusters of Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 152
5.3.1 Summary of the analysis of properties of different
final clusters
164
Vowels
164
5.4.1 Vowel pairs and triplets
164
5.4.2 Vowels in light/gaze-words
166
5.4.3 The vowel [P]
167
5.4.4 Summary of vowels
167
Comparisons of final clusters of roots from different sources
167
5.5.1 NFO4 and Sigurd (1965)
167
5.6
5.7
6
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
5.5.2 The most frequent final clusters in NFO4
5.5.3 Discussion of final clusters in Svensk
Baklängesordbok and of Nusvensk Frekvensordbok
Combinations of initial and final consonant clusters
5.6.1 Initial cluster + no final cluster
5.6.2 No initial cluster + final cluster
5.6.3 Initial cluster + final cluster
5.6.4 Summary of combinations
Summary and discussion of initial and final clusters,
and vowels
Some contrastive studies in sound symbolism
Introduction
The Thesaurus study
6.2.1 Method
6.2.2 Results
6.2.2.1Words for 'stupidity' in English
6.2.2.2 Words for 'stupidity' in Swedish
6.2.2.3 Words for 'surface structure' in English
6.2.2.4 Words for 'surface structure' in Swedish
6.2.3 Conclusions of the Thesaurus study
Some interjections in different languages
6.3.1 Swedish expressive interjections
6.3.2 Discussion of Swedish expressive interjections,
commands and greetings
6.3.3 Phonological and phonetic similarities and
dissimilarities between interjections of different languages
Imitations of animal calls
6.4.1 Expressions for animal calls in Swedish and other
languages
6.4.2 A test of expressions for animal calls of different
languages
6.4.3 Results from a test of expressions for animal calls
in different languages
6.4.4 Discussion of the test on identifying animal calls
Conclusions of studies of expressive interjections
and expressions of animal calls
171
172
174
175
179
182
185
186
189
189
189
189
190
190
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
202
202
205
206
208
208
6.6
7
8
Test of cross language interpretation of Swedish
onomatopoeic and other sound symbolic words
6.6.1 Method
6.6.2 Results of interpretation of cross language Swedish
onomatopoeic and other sound symbolic words
6.6.3 Conclusions from the test on cross language
interpretation of Swedish onomatopoeic and other
sound symbolic words
6. 7
General conclusions and discussion of the cross
language studies
Experiments with words constructed from
phonesthemes
7.1
Production and understanding
7.1.1 Forced choice for production - from meaning to
phonological (graphic) form
7.1.2 Forced choice for understanding - from phonological
form to meaning
7.1.3 Free production test from constructed words to
meanings
7.1.4 Free production from meaning to constructed word
7.1.5 Matching test of nonsense words and meanings
7.1.6 Summary of results of tests on interpreting meanings
and sounds
Summary and discussion
8.1
The research questions were as follows:
8.1.1 Question 1
8.1.2 Question 2
8.1.3 Question 3
8.1.4 Question 4
8.2 Comparison of the studies
8.3 Possible explanations of onomatopoeia and sound symbolism
8.3.1 Pejoratives
8.3.2 Summary
8.4 Predictions for sound symbolism in Swedish
8.5 Main objectives and further research
210
210
211
215
217
219
215
223
226
229
232
238
239
245
245
246
252
255
257
258
263
265
266
268
271
Introduction
The purpose of this thesis is to study some aspects of the wide field of
onomatopoeia and other sound symbolism with special reference to
Swedish. A large part of the study is devoted to a description, semantic and
phonological, of onomatopoeia and other sound symbolism1 of initial and
final consonant clusters, and also of vowels.
One main interest is the issue of productivity, which is studied mainly with
the aid of experiments.
Furthermore, the issue of universals is addressed through partial
comparisons with other languages and also through tests of perception of
Swedish onomatopoeia and sound symbolism.
The purpose is finally to construct a model for sound symbolism as a
central part of language, and to construct an explanatory model for the
semantic aspect of sound symbolism in Swedish.
The research questions of the thesis are the following:
1. What are the properties of sound symbolic sequences in Swedish? More
specifically the questions are:
Which initial and final consonant clusters are used in sound
symbolism?
Which meanings are used in sound symbolism?
How do these combine in phonesthemes?
What are the sound symbolic characteristics of some vowels?
How do initial and final clusters and vowels combine in words?
2. Are phonesthemes productive in Swedish? And, if so, are some
phonesthemes more productive than others? Are neologisms created or
interpreted in accordance with the semantic model of chapter 2 and the
analysis of chapters 4 and 5?
3. Are there similarities or dissimilarities, in some specific aspects of sound
symbolism, between different languages?
4. Do non-Swedish speakers interpret Swedish phonesthemes in accordance
with the semantic model of chapter 2 and the analysis of chapters 4 and 5?
1
cf. p. 4
1
1 Background
1.1 Purpose of the chapter
The area of onomatopoeia and other sound symbolism has not been
central in linguistics. Nevertheless, most linguists have had something to
say on the subject, in many cases using different terminologies. In this
chapter there will be a thematic overview of some of the most interesting
contributions. The themes that are especially important are the questions
of integration into language (grammar and lexicon), of productivity, of
universality and of explanation. The chapter will end with a summary of
forms and meanings of onomatopoeic and sound symbolic expressions.
1.2 Terminology
There are two problems with the terminology in this area. First, there are
a lot of terms. Second, the terms are not always used in the same way, and
they are seldom defined. The greatest confusion, if one doesn't know the
author's purpose, is perhaps that the term symbolic is often used to mean
sound symbolic (i. e. words or other expressions having a sound structure
that is not independent of their meaning), and not as a contrast to
indexical and iconic (cf. Peirce (1955) and Allwood and Andersson
(1976)). In this thesis, the term symbolic is therefore not used as a
synonym to sound symbolic. If the term is used, it is used in the
traditional way, for conventional non-motivated signs.
1.2.1 Onomatopoeia
Nordberg (1986) gives a definition. ‘‘Onomatopoeia in a restricted sense
refers to imitation of natural sounds, e.g. of animals’’. I do not believe it
is necessary to restrict the term onomatopoeia to natural sounds even
though, of course, this is a special kind of onomatopoeia. I will use the
term onomatopoeia for all kinds of sound imitation.
1.2.2 Sound symbolism
Nordberg (1986) writes ‘‘Sound symbol or phonestheme ... is the
synesthetic combination of a certain sound or sound sequence with a
particular notion or a particular connotative content.’’ Jakobson and
Waugh (1979) define sound symbolism as ‘‘an inmost, natural association
between sound and meaning’’. Malkiel (1994) uses the term
phonosymbolism to mean the same, he writes, as sound symbolism.
3
I will use the term sound symbolism as a general term for an iconic or
indexical relationship between sound and meaning, and also between
sound and sound (which is onomatopoeia). Onomatopoeia is then a special
case of sound symbolism. Onomatopoeia and other sound symbolism will
also be termed motivated expressions.
1.2.3 Phonestheme
Phonesthemes are sometimes called word affinities or verbal affinities and
are described as associated with ‘‘a marginal set of vocables which are
semantically fluid, more expressive than cognitive’’ (Jakobson and
Waugh, 1979) or as ‘‘the grouping of similar meanings about similar
sound’’ (Bolinger, 1965). (The relation between phonesthemes and
morphemes is discussed in 1.2.5). Householder's (1946) definition of a
phonestheme is: ‘‘a phoneme or cluster of phonemes shared by a group of
words which also have in common some element of meaning or function,
though the words may be etymologically unrelated’’ The definition above
could be improved by changing ‘‘words’’ into ‘‘morphemes’’ (for a
discussion of the morpheme, see 1.2.5).
Another term is psychomorphs (Markell and Hemp, 1960), which is used
in approximately the same sense as phonesthemes. Bolinger (1950) also
uses the term submorphemic differentials or submorphs which are
described as ‘collocations of phonemes common to a set of words and
suggestive of a stronger or vaguer semantic interconnection. He uses the
term affective morphemes as synonymous to phonesthemes. Nordberg
(1986) coins the term sound words (onomatopoeic elements) as the joint
designation for ideophones, sound symbols, phonesthemes and
onomatopoeia since he claims that the boundaries are fuzzy. Nordberg
also writes that onomatopoeic elements are not such vaguely imitative
words with normal phonotactics as e.g. Swedish susa 'sigh', klucka
'cluck', fladdra 'flutter', etc. but purely sound-illustrative sequences,
reminiscent of the sound balloons of comic strips.
1.2.4. Ideophone
Childs (1994) discusses the problem of defining ideophones and claims
that often one or more of the following criteria are met: ideophones often
have unusual phonological characteristics, and they often display very
little morphology. Syntactically they are often set apart from the rest of
4
an utterance. In some languages they constitute a separate syntactic
category, in others not. Semantically they often underscore the meaning
of a verb, and often, but not always, they are sound symbolic. In many
cases ideophones show a close connection to gestures.
This kind of phenomenon seems to correspond best to the ‘‘sound words’’
of adolescent language, described by Nordberg (1986), (e.g. krch, ppff,
dåing, ‘‘har hon håret så här, så här: tsscchht ’’ (‘‘she wears her hair like
this, like this: tsscchh’’, etc.)) but not to phonesthemes.
The term ideophone will not be used in my own analysis of onomatopoeia
and sound symbolism in Swedish, partly because different authors use the
term in a non-uniform way. Even if I do not treat ideophones in my own
analysis I will use the term as it is described above, in discussing some of
the authors below.
1.2.5 Morpheme
What exactly is the relation between phonesthemes and morphemes? Are
phonesthemes really morphemes or are they something different? The
most common definition of a morpheme is ‘‘a minimal meaning carrying
unit’’, but that definition in this context seems to apply to phonesthemes
rather than to what traditionally has been labeled morphemes: The lexeme
bjäfs (gewgaws) can be analyzed as one morpheme. But it can, at the same
time, be analyzed as consisting of the minimal meaning units bj1 'pejorative', -E- 'pejorative, and -fs 'pejorative'. It seems that these are
really the minimal meaning carrying units.
However, these minimal meaning carrying units do not build up the whole
meaning of the word bjäfs. The meaning of a sound symbolic word is
more than the meaning of its parts, but this also goes for many lexicalized
compounds, e.g. blackbird means more than 'black bird'. In the case of
other sound symbolic words, however, it seems that the meaning of a
word is almost always more than the meaning of its parts. As a contrast,
the meaning of onomatopoeic words, like plask, is often not more than the
meaning of its parts: pl- 'wetness' and -sk 'wetness'.
1Phonemes will be marked with bold type and are not put between slashes. The symbol P
will be used for the short rounded close-mid vowel, e.g. the first vowel in muttra
(mutter).
5
Also, in a productive perspective, neologisms are sometimes created or
understood out of (one or more) minimal meaning units (phonesthemes)
and these can thus be seen as building blocks for word meaning.
Distributionally, phonesthemes are not whole words (lexemes) but parts
of words and could thus not qualify as free morphemes. They could
perhaps be described as bound morphemes, i. e. as affixes. However,
there is a fact that contradicts this interpretation, on the expression side:
bound morphemes in Swedish can include a vowel or consist of a single
consonant or of a consonant cluster. The domain of the phonestheme is
often a consonant cluster. This shows that the expression side of
phonesthemes is only partially different from other bound morphemes, in
Swedish. But there are also other more problematic facts on the
expression side in traditional morphology (for a discussion see e.g.
Källström (1988), e.g. suppletion (be, am are, is, was, were) and
inflecting and fusioned declination (e.g. finna, fann, funnen), so it is not
clear that this would distinguish phonesthemes from morphemes.
Another problem can be illustrated by the word flämta (pant), where flis a phonestheme imitating movement. The rest of the word -ämta would
have to be called a restmorph. Restmorphs comprise a problematic, but
not unusual, category in morphology. A way to avoid too many
restmorphs is to say that in sound symbolic words there are meaning units
in independent dimensions to morphemes, e. g. in the morphemes bjäfs
and flämta; bjäfs and flämta are meaning units on one level which at the
same time contain bj- (in bjäfs ) and fl- (in flämta), with pejorative
meanings on another level. Examples such as these show that it is a
problem to determine how far the morphological analysis should go (see
Källström, 1988).
Phonesthemes can be placed in a hierarchy between phonemes and
morphemes, where morphemes and phonesthemes both are meaning
bearing units while phonemes are not (figure 1.1).
6
morphemes
phonesthemes
phonemes
Figure 1.1. The hierarchy between phonemes and morphemes.
Phonesthemes are built up from phonemes, morphemes can (partly) be
built up from phonesthemes, but phonesthemes are never built up of
morphemes.
The morpheme is a connection between expression and meaning. When
the expression varies, e.g. dog-s [z] - cat-s [s] they are called allomorphs.
A parallel distinction could be made between e.g. the pejoratives pj-, bj-,
fj- which can be called ‘‘allophonests2 ’’ to a phonestheme (with pejorative
meaning), in an item-and-arrangement analysis. (Alternatively, pj-, bjand fj- can be analyzed as labial obstruent + j.) These examples show that
these types of analyses can be done with phonesthemes, as well as with
regular morphemes.
A certain consonant cluster can sometimes be the expression of a
phonestheme, but sometimes not, (e.g. kl- kladdig (sound symbolic),
klöver (not sound symbolic). The phonestheme appears in interaction with
the word meaning, when it fits the expression3 . That means that we have
homonymy/polysemy in phonesthemes, e.g. kl- can mean 'adhesion' as in
kladdig (sticky), klibbig (sticky), kletig (smeary), klick (dollop), 'wetness'
as in klafsa (squelch), it can be 'onomatopoeic' as in klang (clang),
klappra (clatter), klatsch (slap), klicka (click), kling (tinkle), klirra
(jingle), klämta (toll), klucka (lap) and it can mean a 'certain form' as in
klimp (lump), kloss (block), klot (ball), klubba (club), klump (lump) and
it is 'pejorative' as in kludda (daub), klotter (doodle), etc, cf. chapter 4.
2This term will, however, not be used further.
3There can also be interaction between different sounds in the word, cf. analysis in 5.5.
7
We also have a variation between some phonesthemic meaning and none,
e.g. we have no phonesthemic meaning in klöver (clover). Certain
consonant clusters are almost always phonesthemic, e.g. pj-, while others
are less phonesthemic, e.g. tr-. This means that there is a variation in the
strength of the connection between content and expression in
phonesthemes, a quantitative dimension of the morphology.
Consequently, there are arguments for and against whether phonesthemes
are morphemes or not. The meaning of the concept morpheme is vague,
but I suggest that phonesthemes belong to morphology. It is one type of
morpheme, a type which is special on the semiotic and semantic side: the
relation to what is denoted is often iconic or indexical and what is denoted
are often sounds, experiences of the senses, emotions, etc.
Phonesthemes are also special in that they have a low degree of autonomy.
They are bound morphemes which often can be analytically distinguished
in a fashion similar to free morphemes. They will be referred to as
phonesthemes and regarded as a type of morpheme which, because of
their dependent and motivated nature, perhaps could rather be called
submorphemes.
1.2.6 Conclusion
Above, there has been a survey of different terms and usages.
Subsequently, the term onomatopoeia will be used to mean all kinds of
sound imitation, phonestheme will be used to mean bound submorphemic
(cf. above) strings (e.g. consonant clusters) which have in common a
certain element of meaning or function. The relation between sound and
meaning is often iconic or indexical, as well as symbolic. The term sound
symbolism will be used for the general phenomenon of motivated
relations between sound and meaning, including onomatopoeia. Thus
sound symbolism, in a sense, is used almost oppositely to the sense of
symbolism that was suggested by Peirce, i. e. it focuses on what he called
icons and indexes but not symbols. Most of the words discussed also
contain a conventional arbitrary element which means we are dealing with
what could be called iconic and indexical symbols. (For further
discussion, see chapter 2.)
There also seems to be a further terminological issue here, in that sound
symbolism tends to be reserved for universal phenomena and
8
phonesthemes for language specific phenomena. I would, however, prefer
to use sound symbolism as a more general term and use the term universal
sound symbolism when this is the issue.
The relationship between the most important terms discussed here can be
illustrated in the following way (figure 1.2).
sound symbolism or
motivated expressions
onomatopoeia
phonesthemes
other sound symbolism
phonesthemes
free morphemes
free morphemes
Figure 1.2. The relationship between some of the most important terms
discussed in 1.2.
1.3. Is sound symbolism the rule or the exception
in language?
1.3.1 Sound symbolism is an exception
Saussure (1916) who held the view that linguistic signs are arbitrary
wrote that ‘‘onomatopoeic words are never organic elements of a
linguistic system’’. Bühler (1933/1969) said that onomatopoeia is a
reversion, since language has evolved beyond primitive needs and means
of self-expression. The genesis of language is a measure of its success at
arbitrary symbolic (i. e. not what I call sound symbolic) representation.
1.3.2 Sound symbolism is fundamental to language
Already von der Gabelentz (1891) wrote about the ‘‘sound symbolic
feeling’’, the experience that sound and meaning are inalienably
interconnected for the naive members of the speech community. For
9
example, naive Germans would say ‘‘that Frenchmen are silly when they
name ein Pferd Schewall’’ (Jakobson and Waugh, p. 182).
An opposite view was held by Saussure's contemporary Jespersen (1922
a), who went as far as to claim that ‘‘languages in the course of time grow
richer and richer in symbolic’’ (that is sound symbolic) ‘‘words’’ and
‘‘develop towards a greater number of easy and adequate expressions –
expressions in which sound and sense are united in a marriage-union
closer than was ever known to our remote ancestors’’.
To the extent that African so called ideophones are discussed (by e.g.
Samarin, 19784) these are usually considered part of language proper.
One might question if this is because ideophones play a much more central
role in certain African languages than in European languages, or whether
there is another, freer tradition in describing non-European and primarily
spoken languages. Diffloth (1976) writes that in describing languages with
a structure remote from ones own language, it is often self-evident to
segment roots into smaller, significant units with their own sound
symbolic value, thereby touching on the subject of how grammatical
tradition may obscure interesting phenomena in a language.
Lakoff and Johnson (1980), showing many examples, claim that in all of
language, including syntax, there are many cases of non-arbitrary
relations between form and meaning. This seems to point to a view of
non-arbitrariness being integrated in language and not in a separate
category.
A phenomenon in Swedish which is similar to ideophones (cf. 1.2.4) are
the ‘‘sound words’’ of adolescent language, described by Nordberg
(1986), e.g. krch, ppff, dåing. These are usually not considered to belong
to the core of Swedish, if described at all. However, they show interesting
similarities to e.g. the ideophones in Gbeya (a dialect of Gbaya, spoken in
Central Africa), (Samarin, 1978); they show reduplication, lengthening,
phonotactic ‘‘divergencies’’ and sentence final position. The greatest
4Samarin defines ideophony as ‘‘the foregrounding of phonological elements in word (or
lexeme) composition in both spontaneous creations and fully institutionalized lexicons,
usually associated with semantic categories of an attributive nature, commonly affective,
and sometimes also in true onomatopoeia’’
10
difference to Gbeyan seems to be on the semantic side; Gbeyan words
seem to have more specific meanings, that can be assigned dictionary-type
definitions, e.g. ndadak ndadak ‘‘(wood that) doesn’t split well in
chopping’’.
1.3.3 Sound symbolism is both inside and outside
of language
Householder (1946), writes that the vocabulary of English falls into three
parts with regard to arbitrariness of structure: 1) those clearly and
completely arbitrary, their meaning unaffected by the sound, 2) those
made up, in whole or part, of phonesthemes, 3) those belonging primarily
to the first group but with their meaning colored or altered in varying
degree by secondary association with phonesthemes.
In the Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology (1967) the consonant wris a separate entry meaning ‘‘consonant combination occurring initially in
many words implying twisting or distortion’’. The dictionary further
states that the meaning of twisting has many correspondences in other
Germanic languages5 .
Wescott (1975) uses the term ‘‘microlanguage’’ for the core of language,
which is subject to well-known grammatical rules – i.e. conventional
language. For other domains of speech, e.g. baby talk, exclamations,
verbal art – ‘‘language that is alienated from conventionally structured
speech’’, he coins the cover term ‘‘allolanguage’’. He says, ‘‘one of the
characteristics of allolanguage is a closer relation between sound and sense
than obtains in microlanguage’’, ‘‘a retention ... of an older and simpler
manner of self expression alongside one that is more recent and
complex.’’ Sound symbolism, being one aspect of allolanguage, is thus
part of language, but on the periphery, according to Wescott.
Sounds can enter a language by means of sound symbolic words (e.g.
Hinton, 1986). Also, sound changes often do not affect sound symbolic
words, so that phonemes that should have disappeared in a language or
have become restricted to certain environments are still to be found in
sound symbolic vocabulary (as pointed out by Hinton, Nichols, Ohala
5Cf. the Swedish clusters kr- and sn-, in chapter 4.
11
1994). E. g. initial r- is rare in the non sound-symbolic vocabulary of
Finnish (Austerlitz, 1994).
There are also suggestions of tendencies to use a more reduced phonemic
inventory in sound symbolism (e.g. Oswalt 1994).
1.3.4 Evaluation of discussion of sound symbolism
The view of the difference between sound symbolic words and other
words assumed in this thesis is the following: For most words, the
ordinary speaker will, on reflection, agree that there is no motivation for
them (e.g. for horse) but he/she will say that there is a motivation for
sound symbolic words. Of course there will be a border area where
different speakers will disagree or find it hard to judge.
Bolinger (1950) takes a radical methodological approach to morphology
in general, with phonesthemes (which are also called affective morphemes
in contrast to neutral morphemes, in spite of the impossibility of stating
where the neutral ends and the affective begins) as one type of possible
output from a strictly synchronic analysis. According to Bolinger, the
alternative approach of taking etymology into account is not available
since ordinary, naive speakers' judgements are important for discovering
morphemes. Bolinger suggests the existence of numerous phonesthemes
but also claims that they are too fluid to be penned with limits. One
possible way to evaluate morphemes, according to Bolinger, would be
through lexical and textual frequencies (cf. chapter 4). Bolinger claims
that roughly half of the words, in English, beginning with gl- have the
implication ‘‘visual’’. Bolinger claims that as percentages go this is better
than some of the paradigmatic suffixes (with regard to a constant
association of meaning and form), though of course gl- is never more
than sporadically productive.
1.4 Is sound symbolism productive or not?
1.4.1 Sound symbolism is not productive
Samarin (1978), in his studies of Gbeyan, has not found support for the
creation of new ideophones (cf. 1.2.4). In traditional etymology the
explanation of new coinages is often just by ‘‘analogy’’ with one other
word (which implies non-productivity).
12
1.4.2 Sound symbolism is productive
Most of the above mentioned linguists who are specifically interested in
the phenomenon and who view it as an integral part of language, also
regard it as productive. For example, Nordberg (1986) who studied sound
words, deals almost exclusively with new coinages.
1.4.3 Greater or lesser degree of productivity
Rhodes (1994) discusses onomatopoeia, aural images (mapping sound onto
sound) and forms based on aural images. He distinguishes between ‘‘wild’’
and ‘‘tame’’ words, these being the ends of a scale. ‘‘At the extreme wild
end the possibilities of the human vocal tract are utilized to their fullest to
imitate sounds of other than human origin. At the tame end the imitated
sound is simply approximated by an acoustically close phoneme or
phoneme combination.’’
Bolinger does an assonance-rime analysis of English monosyllables (cf.
Bolinger 1950) where the initial consonant(s) constitute the assonance and
the remainder of the syllable is the rime. He argues that assonance-rime
analysis (of tame words) is morphology because assonances and rimes do
not combine productively. That, however, does not mean that a
construction is frozen. He introduces the term ‘‘active’’ for constructions
that produce monosyllables continuously, at a slow rate.
1.4.4 Evaluation of the discussion of productivity
The hypothesis that will be tested in the experiments is that phonesthemes
are productive to a greater or lesser degree, i.e. that some phonesthemes
are more productive than others. The intermittent occurrence of new
forms in speech, prose and fiction, (which fit into a pattern), especially in
child literature, constitutes an argument for this claim. The opposite view
would mean that new coinages would be phonetically and semantically
haphazard. However, with that view, the fairly wide-spread and easy
comprehension of new forms would be difficult to account for. The
concept of phonestheme involves stronger or weaker productivity.
The distinction between understanding and production might also be
fruitful. When being presented with deliberately constructed nonsense
words in the experiments of this thesis, listeners have no objections to or
difficulties in assigning some interpretation to them (cf. 7.1.3).
13
Another problem, in this area of research is to decide where the
borderline goes between lexicalized and more temporary, newly created,
forms. In other words, what I experience as a neologism can be an
established word in a subgroup or an (extinct) dialectal word.6
1.5 The question of etymology
In an etymological perspective this part of the vocabulary is less static in
one aspect, more static in another; onomatopoeic words are constantly
recreated, but this also makes them keep much the same form throughout
the ages, as they don't always undergo general changes of sound and
meaning Jespersen (1922 a) gives the example of cuckoo which has not
changed its vowel from [u] to [U], as in cut, but is pronounced [kuku]. An
onomatopoeic word is constrained by the sound it imitates.
In accounting for onomatopoeic and other sound symbolic expressions, a
synchronic explanation will be given, irrespective of whether the
explanation is historically ‘‘true’’ or ‘‘false’’. Some examples will be given
of what some critics of classical etymology have stated. First, however, it
should be pointed out that there seems to be a general agreement that
onomatopoeic (and also sound symbolic) words usually do not undergo
the same phonological changes as other words, e.g. according to Grimm's
law, as long as they still have a sound imitative meaning. They constantly
get renewed and sometimes reshaped by fresh imitation. Wescott (1975)
writes: ‘‘Thus, the reconstructed proto-indoeuropean forms *pap- ‘‘teat’’,
*tut- ‘‘to hoot’’ and *kuku- ‘‘cuckoo’’, appear in English as pap, toot, and
cuckoo rather than, as comparative philologists would normally predict,
*faf, *thuth and *houhg.’’
6Existing forms, like place-names, can also be given a (new) meaning, befitting their
form, as in the book ‘‘The meaning of Liff’’ (Adams & LLoyd, 1983), which states that
‘‘In life, there are many hundreds of common experiences, feelings, situations and even
objects which we all know and recognize, but for which no words exist. On the other
hand, the world is littered with thousands of spare words, which spend their time doing
nothing but loafing on signposts pointing at places...’’ These names and meanings are
then paired like e.g., Cranleigh: a mood of irrational irritation with everyone and
everything, Burbage: The sound made by a lift full of people all trying to breathe politely
through their noses, or Plymouth: to relate an amusing story to someone without
remembering that it was they who told it to you in the first place.
14
On the other hand, Jespersen (1922 a) also remarks that ‘‘words that have
been symbolically expressive may cease to be so in consequence of
historical development, either phonetic, semantic or both.’’ An example,
according to Jespersen, is the word crow which is not now so good an
imitation of the sound made by the bird as OE crawe was. And whine,
pipe were better imitations when the vowel was still i as in Danish hvine,
pibe. But the sound made by a small bird is still pronounced with an i in
peep.
Furthermore, writes Jespersen, some words have in the course of time
become more expressive than they were at first. This phenomenon he calls
secondary echoism or secondary symbolism. Patter ‘‘to talk rapidly or
glibly’’ is to all intents a truly symbolical word, even though it comes
from pater (paternoster) and at first meant to repeat that prayer.
An interesting example in Swedish is (atjo) prosit as a polite reaction to a
sneeze, of which the latter word is probably apprehended as
onomatopoeic, at least by children. (The word atjo is of course motivated.
It is a conventionalization of a sound from a bodily reaction and the
relation between the sound and the meaning is indexical (cf. the crosslinguistic comparison in chapter 5). The Latin original meaning of prosit
(which is ‘‘måtte det gagna’’ (may it be of use)) is probably quite dead in
the mental lexicons of most speakers. On the other hand, according to
Jespersen (1922 a), there are words which we feel instinctively to be
adequate to express the ideas they stand for and others, the sound of which
are felt to be more or less incongruous with their signification. These
feelings of adequacy or incongruity are both examples of etymological
creativity. A Swedish example of incongruity is perhaps munter (joyful)7 .
Jespersen (1922 a, b) talks about ‘‘symbolism at work’’ where both sound
and sense fit. Also, he writes, through changes in meaning, too, some
words have become more expressive than they were formerly. His
example is miniature, which, because of the i, has come to mean ‘‘a small
picture’’ instead of ‘‘image painted with a minimum of vermilion’’.
Jespersen claims that ‘‘sound symbolism makes some words more fit to
survive’’. The word roll, in French rouler, etc. derived from Latin rota +
7Because of the [P], cf. 5.4.3.
15
diminutive ending -ul- gained its popularity in English, Dutch, German,
and Scandinavian languages, because the sound is suggestive of the sense.
He also talks of sound symbolism being in action when borrowing words
from other languages and when coining nouns, verbs, etc. from (place)
names. To sum up then, according to Jespersen, onomatopoeia and other
sound symbolism do not always date back to the earliest times, and it is
mostly uninteresting to lay any aspects of ‘‘correct etymology’’ on words
affected by onomatopoeia and sound symbolism.
Wescott (1978) would make the same claim for most words, but especially
for slang and proper names. He takes a polygenetic view of word origins
and assumes that ‘‘lexical ancestry is relative rather than absolute in
nature’’ and that because of this derivational relativity ‘‘there is a gradual
‘fade-out’ in the etymological antecedence of any lexeme and that this
fade-out effect, in turn, leads inescapably to subjectivity in the assessment
of degrees of lexical ancestry’’. Of the various processes that contribute to
the development of polygenetic lexemes are, e.g. sound repetition,
indifferent varieties, elision or ‘‘chopping’’, the conversion of spoken
language into written language and the consequent feedback effect of
writing on speech.8
Von der Gabelentz (1891) observes historically ‘‘false’’ but synchronically
‘‘true’’ etymologies based on collective agreement within a given speech
community. He writes that words linked together by both sound and
meaning manifest ‘‘elective affinities’’ (wahlverwandtschaften) able to
modify both the shape and the content of the words involved. Here, it is
natural to refer to Householder's (1946) definition of a phonestheme: ‘‘a
phoneme or cluster of phonemes shared by a group of words which also
have in common some element of meaning or function, though the words
may be etymologically unrelated.’’ (Traditionally, words are said to be
etymologically related if they can be traced back to the same word, but
not if they contain the same phonestheme, as a part of words. It would
probably be fruitful for etymological study to explore the concept of
8There is another kind of etymology, namely folk etymology, which I believe is an
expression for the same mental process as in productive sound symbolism. There seems
to exist a human inclination for motivated signs. Instead of using sounds that fit the
meaning, existing words are reshaped through using other but similar-sounding
morphemes to make the resulting word more morphologically transparent.
16
phonestheme, i.e. sound symbolic links could be just as valid as other
morphological links.)
Bolinger (1968) also holds the view that traditional etymology is not
relevant for explaining phonesthemes (for methodological reasons, cf.
above). He also describes phonesthemes like this: ‘‘Given a particular
word for a particular thing, if other words for similar things come to
resemble that word in sound, then, no matter how arbitrary the
relationship between sound and sense was to begin with, the sense is now
obviously tied to the sound. The relationship between sound and sense is
still arbitrary, as far as the outside world is concerned (and would appear
that way absolutely to a foreigner), but within the system it is no longer
so’’ (p. 242). Bolinger (1950) also argues that when two expressions are
encountered in the same area of greater or lesser specificity of meaning,
and are also similar in form, they are likely to exercise a kind of magnetic
attraction one upon the other. The attraction may be extremely remote.
Most speakers of English, according to Bolinger (1950), when they hear
ambush, are likely to think of someone hiding in the bushes. Likewise
with hierarchy: one tends to hear the element higher. (This phenomenon
could be called 'interpretive folk etymology'.) Bolinger (1950) is very
consistent in his synchronic (and spoken language) approach, which
sometimes leads to absurdities. His main arguments for the irrelevance of
etymology is that it doesn't match speakers' judgements and that it isn't
compatible with morpheme convergence and divergence.
Malkiel (1994) discusses the role of phonosymbolic (i.e. sound symbolic)
interference in the sound development of words. He especially discusses
the example of the older French word for close developed from Latin
claudere being replaced (in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages) by the
word fermer under the influence of the word for iron (ferrum), a then
newly introduced, highly prestigious metal.
It is sometimes pointed out that every word has its own history, which is
an anomalistic point of view (in the sense of antique Greek-Roman
distinction of ‘‘anomaly vs. analogy’’). But one could also talk about
different rule systems conflicting. Malkiel, for example, refers to
Meillet's (1931) discussion on phonetic mini-systems explaining
exceptional lexical units handed down from one generation to another.
17
These mini-systems could well have existed side by side with the basic
phonological structure.
Rhodes (1994) writes that the abundant etymological dictionary comments
like ‘‘origin uncertain’’ or ‘‘prob. akin to’’ for English monosyllables
should convince one that these are innovated continuously, but at a slow
rate (active combination, in contrast to productive and frozen). There is
also, he writes, an ongoing reinterpretation of forms of various historical
sources as new instances of assonances (initial consonants). An example is
the largely Germanic sl- liquid (slop, slush) classifier (a type of
phonestheme) which also, semantically, includes the sl- in Latinate sluice
(< Vulgar Latin *exclusa), (Swe: sluss), in spite of different etymological
origins.
1.6 The phylogenesis of language
From the question of etymology it is natural to go on to a related question
in which onomatopoeia and sound symbolism have figured, namely the
question of the phylogenesis of language.
Plato, in the dialogue Cratylos, treats the contest between the two basic
linguistic forces, convention and nature. The argument concerned the
nature of names; Cratylos meant that names were given by nature,
Socrates that they were conventional.
Most theories of the origin of language have built on onomatopoeia, the
‘‘bow-wow theory’’ (e.g. Herder, 1772) (cf. Müller, 1861) for the names
‘‘bow-wow’’, etc) or on gestures, (e.g. Herman Paul, according to Fano,
1962). Other variants are ‘‘divine origin’’, (e.g. Süssmilch, 1767) or ‘‘the
pooh-pooh theory’’ (e.g. Rousseau, 1822), which says that the origin of
language lies in interjectional, emotional cries triggered by strong feelings
of fear, pain, lust, etc. The ‘‘yo-he-ho theory’’ says that in collective
labor, rhythmically produced spoken sounds help coordinate the actions of
many individuals. ‘‘The sing-song theory’’ (e.g. Jespersen, 1922 a) means
that the origin of language lies in dance, song and related expressive
vocalizing.
Max Müller (1861), (who has coined humorous expressions) is a
representative for the ‘‘ding-dong theory’’, which might appear to give a
sound symbolic explanation. It is, however, based on his reconstruction of
18
400-500 Indo-European roots. He writes that man had an innate
inclination to associate certain types of sound with certain types of objects
and actions which echoed in him in a way which is analogous to an
object's resonance when struck. The reconstructed Indo-European roots
are an outgrowth of the ding-dong effect. Müller would not, as would e.g.
Jespersen, say that sound symbolism is productive in language, but that
this instinct to give articulate expression for rational concepts in the
human mind has disappeared since there is no longer a need for it, once
language is established.
One theory of how spoken language has developed from gestural language
is ‘‘the mouth-gesture theory’’ (Paget, 1930 and Jóhannesson, 1949). It
says, briefly, that the organs of speech tend to move in unison with hand
and arm movements when these are used in sign language or when using
tools. If such movements of the speech organs are accompanied by
vocalizations, then the resulting sounds (that are similar to sounds in
articulated speech) eventually get the same meaning as the gestures. The
gestures of the organs of articulation are recognized by the hearer because
the hearer unconsciously reproduced in his mind the actual gesture which
had produced the sound.
Jóhannesson (1949) presents material from both Indo-European and
Semitic sources. In Indo-European languages, he claims that about 5% of
the words could be attributed to interjection, probably of emotion, and
10% to onomatopoeia, leaving 85% explainable as direct or indirect
derivations from mouth-gesture.
Other theories of the origin of language have focused more on why and
less on how language appeared, e.g. because of social need (Révész, 1946)
or cerebral development or as a consequence of early child language
development. An example of the later is ‘‘the babble-luck theory’’
(Thorndike, 1943), which is to be understood as a theory of the selective
reinforcement of initial, random babbling, which later became words.
Thorndike has been criticized for not explaining how the parents of the
earliest babblers were able to shape infant vocalizations.
Some linguists (explicitly) believe in monogenesis, others in polygenesis
of human language. For a much more extensive review on the subject, see
Hewes (1977). I will not take a stand on these theories of the origin of
19
language, but suspect that the solution probably lies in a combination of
different theories, one of them being the bow-wow variant.
The foregoing section leads up to the question of the role of onomatopoeia
and sound symbolism in the ontogenesis of language. One of the more
recent investigations, Williams (1991), concerns the phenomenon of [da]
universally having a deictic function in early language acquisition. She
finds support for the mechanism of cross-modal transfer existing as a
bridge to the acquisition of language and she holds that this can shed some
light on sound symbolism in adult language. The cross-modal transfer
doesn't disappear entirely once it has fulfilled its function, even though
this aspect may later be regarded as superfluous. Without any other
comparison this is similar to Müller's (1861) views on the genesis of
language.
1.7 Universality versus language specificity
One important question, which is not always clearly accounted for, is that
of the universality or language specificity of sound symbolism.
Universality can be a feature of the semantic side, the expressive side or
more abstractly.
1.7.1 Sound symbolism is universal
Samarin (e.g. 1978) writes that it is a universal fact that all languages use
onomatopoeia and sound symbolism, but that the expressions differ. He
does not make any claims for the semantic side, other than that all
languages have an expressive function.
Bolinger (1965) writes that the tendency of forms to mold themselves on
other forms with like meanings and of meanings to mold themselves on
other meanings, conveyed by like words, is universal. Allot (1973), using
data from many languages, claims that there is a tendency for words that
sound similar to have similar meanings in languages not known to be
historically related.
The meaning of [i] has been well studied, and claims have been made for
its universality in sound symbolism (Ultan, 1978; Jespersen, 1933).
There seems to be a general agreement that phonesthemes are language
specific, a conclusion which is not necessary; besides, phonesthemes are
20
often similar in related languages. A reasonable claim as concerns
universality is that ‘‘the intralinguistic variation recapitulates the
interlinguistic variation’’ (Allwood, 1985). Wescott (1975) handles the
same phenomena by claiming that what is not in the microlanguage
(conventionally structured speech) is to be found in the allolanguage
(speech which is alienated from conventionally structured speech e.g.
infantile babbling, non-grammatical interjection, poetry and song). He
claims universality in processes like reduplication and lengthening. Some
experimental linguists have explicitly tackled the question of universality
by testing people speaking different languages, e.g. Osgood (1962) (see
1.10.5).
Allwood (1983) discusses language in general, about the relationship
between language and thought and its connection with universal and
relativistic standpoints. The conclusions relevant to onomatopoeia and
other sound symbolism are, in brief, that universal traits in language
mostly concern the semantic, not the expression side and that semantic
universals are most likely in areas that are biologically grounded, e.g.
motoric and perceptual activities. Examples are spatial relations and color
terms.
1.7.2 Sound symbolism is not universal
Some linguists seem to have taken the fact that there are differences
between languages concerning (presumptive) onomatopoeia and other
sound symbolism as a proof of the non-existence of sound symbolism, on
the grounds that if sound symbolism did exist, it should be universal in
form and content. This conclusion rests on some unarticulated
assumptions concerning the way in which sound symbolism ought to be
accounted for, e. g. as innate, cf. Bolinger (1968), ‘‘If there were a real
connection between the sound of a word and its meaning, a person who
did not know the language would be able to guess the word if he knew the
meaning and guess the meaning if he heard the word. This almost never
happens, even with words that imitate sounds’’.
Austerlitz (1994) has studied vowels in e.g. Finnish and suggests that there
is a language-specific correlation between recentness and exploitability in
sound symbolism. In Finnish the vowels (and the consonants) are
unequally rooted in the system. The vowel ö /ø/ is the most recent arrival
21
(and is secondary, and marked, as all front rounded vowels are) in the
sound system and it is the vowel which is the most sound symbolic.
1.7.3 Evaluation of the discussion of universality
versus language specificity in sound symbolism
An important question is whether phonesthemes are language specific, as
Bolinger (1950) claims. If so, then the origin of each phonestheme could
be attributed solely to chance, a ‘‘clustering effect’’ (which would be
interesting in itself). Another possibility is that phonesthemes show
universal tendencies, even if ‘‘only’’ in cases concerning semantic
features. If they show universal tendencies, the explanation could partly
have to do with innateness, and partly involve a basic relationship between
environment and individual.
But it may be that, instead of the dichotomy between certain sounds which
are universal and certain phonesthemes which are language specific, one
should distinguish between (a) universal sound symbolism pertaining to
certain sounds and sound clusters and (b) the phenomenon of
‘‘phonesthemicity’’, i. e. the tendency of certain sound-meaning
combinations to mold themselves on other combinations, pertaining to all
sounds and clusters, etc. In the latter case the result could well be
language specific while the thrust for analogy itself is universal. The next
question is if the clustering effect is enhanced in certain types of meaning
or sound. There might also be a frequency effect emanating from
syntagmatic context.
If the semantic-phonetic relationships of motivated words could be
analytically treated one by one, my assumption is that the existence of
universality in phonesthemes on the phonetic side (i. e. that e.g. imitation
of ‘‘wet sounds’’ is done with the same speech sounds in different
languages) is most likely at a level of (combinations of) distinctive
features, e.g. voiceless, fricative, etc.
On the semantic/functional side phonesthemes are probably partly
universal and partly language specific. The result here probably depends,
to a great extent, on how abstract the semantic categorization is. Also,
some semantic fields are more likely to contain sound symbolism, e.g.
[DIMINUTIVE].
22
According to Allwood, as referred to above (1983), the universals in
general to be expected, viz. universals of content are likely to be related
to perception and perhaps to motoric behavior. This proposal does not,
however, explain all semantic categories involved in sound symbolism.
Whorf (1956) has an argument for universals of content: ‘‘in the
psychological experiments, human subjects seem to associate the
experiences of bright, cold, sharp, hard, high, light (in weight), quick,
high-pitched, narrow, and so on in a long series, with each other; and
conversely, the experiences of dark, warm, yielding, soft, blunt, low,
heavy, slow, low-pitched, wide, etc. in another long series. This occurs
whether the WORDS for such associated experiences resemble them or
not, but the ordinary person is likely to NOTICE a relation to words only
when it is a relation of likenesses to such a series in the vowels and
consonants of words’’ (p. 267 f).
It is not always clear if the authors mentioned above have discussed
understanding, production or both. It is most clear in the experiments
conducted, cf. 1.10.5).
1.8 Context
Words (and parts of them) are always perceived in a context, which
influences their interpretation. The types of context that are interesting
for sound symbolism are:
i)
ii)
iii)
phonetic/phonological and semantic
only semantic
situational
The interpretation of the meaning connected with e.g. a consonant cluster
can thus be influenced by phonetic/phonological and semantic
(phonesthemic) context e.g. other consonants, vowels, intonation, etc.
connected with a certain meaning.
The interpretation can also be influenced (e.g. disambiguated) by semantic
context only. For example, a consonant cluster can have as a weak
phonestheme meaning 'wetness'; the cluster pl-, which is otherwise
mainly 'pejorative', can also mean 'wetness'. In the context of other words
23
having to do with wetness (and e.g. a word like rinna (flow)) a neologism
beginning with pl- could adopt a meaning of wetness.
The disambiguation of a consonant cluster can also depend on the speech
situation in which e.g. a neologism or an ambiguous word is uttered, as
for all words. An example of an ambiguous word is klabb (‘‘wet snow’’
or ‘‘chunk of wood’’). The cluster kl- can mean 'wetness' (wet snow) or
'short wide form' (chunk of wood).
It is probable that at least some motivated words, e.g. the sound words of
teenagers (like tssccht in ‘‘she wears her hair like this : tssccht’’), are
more dependent on situational context than more arbitrary lexical
morphemes; a person, who was not present in the situation were the word
‘‘tssccht’’ was uttered, cannot understand exactly how the girl's hair
looked.
Grammont (1933), who was mainly interested in the evocative value of
vowels, especially in word forms reduplicated with a vowel change, in
different languages (e.g. ritsch-ratsch, piff-paff-puff) claimed that the
meaning of a vowel manifests itself when it is prompted by the meaning
of the text or when it at least does not stand in contradiction to it. The
degree depends on the subjectivity of speakers and listeners as well as on
situations, e.g. affective speech and poetry being favorable.
As will be seen in chapter 7, the experiments in the present work are
mainly done without variation of context. The reason for this is the desire
to know how much (if any) of the sound symbolic meaning is conveyed by
certain consonant clusters themselves, without context consisting of
vowels, other consonants, other words, intonation, gestures, etc.
However, in these experiments situational context is present from another
aspect. As is shown in chapter 4, some consonant clusters have a higher
frequency of motivated words with a certain meaning while other
consonant clusters are less dominated by motivated words. This is often
reflected in the results of the tests described in chapter 7. It is reasonable
to believe that neologisms beginning with not so clearly profiled clusters
are more dependent on the linguistic or extralinguistic context for their
interpretation.
24
An example of phonetic/phonological and semantic (phonesthemic)
context could be an invented name like Pjäfser which isn't very attractive
because of the pejorative pj- and the pejorative -fs (like in hafs, slafs,
tjafs, krafs, rufs, bjäfs). These two clusters make the weakly pejorative E- come to life and add to the pejorative impression. (In addition to this
the suffix -er also has a pejorative nuance.)
The cluster fl-, which mainly means 'quick movement' also has the
phonestheme meaning 'pejorative' (and few others). In a neologism like
flafs it is likely that the whole word will be interpreted as a pejorative
because of the pejorative ending -fs. The less common pejorative meaning
of fl- is activated because of the phonological/semantic context of -fs.
From this we can see that words with sound symbolism are neither more
context dependent nor less context dependent than other words. Certain
clusters are more context dependent, while other are less context
dependent, depending on the lexical sound symbolic strength of the cluster
(cf. chapter 4).
While the cluster pj- is mostly pejorative, another clearly sound symbolic
cluster kl- carries several meanings, i.e. 'sound', 'talking', 'pejorative',
'wetness', 'adhesion' and 'short wide form'. What determines the meaning
of a neologism beginning with kl- must be either phonesthemic, other
semantic or situational context. Looking at the examples in Appendix 1
there seems to be a tendency that kl- words meaning 'short wide form'
are monosyllabic and ending with a geminate consonant. They do not end
with fricative clusters; these appear here to be reserved for 'sound' and
'wetness' meanings. Phonesthemic context seems to be important but it is
not possible, at this stage, to give rules for this. (Cf. the discussion in
Allwood (1982) about meaning potential and contextual conditions for
different meanings. Cf. also 5.6.)
The influence of context explains why the same sound (sequence) mostly
unambiguously can appear in both sound symbolic words (as
phonesthemes) and in non-sound symbolic words (as just a phoneme
sequence).
Nerman (1954) makes an interesting analysis of the sound symbolism of
vowels and consonants in Swedish poetry. He writes that they always stand
25
in a context, and really the whole poem, or at least the stanza, ought to be
quoted for every example and that all means conspire: content, rhythm
and ring. However, his analysis is not preceded by a lexical
(paradigmatic) analysis.
1.9 A framework for models of sound symbolism
Models of onomatopoeia and sound symbolism must take such factors into
account as discussed in 1.3-1.8. One factor is the position of onomatopoeia
and other sound symbolism in language, (i. e. in grammar and lexicon).
Are they primarily central or somewhere on the periphery of language? I
claim that onomatopoeia and sound symbolism are central and inside
language and a part of morphology.
However, some newly created motivated expressions (like the sound
words of teenagers, e.g. krch, ppff, dåing) seem to be more context
dependent than most established adjectives, nouns and verbs and therefore
on the periphery of language - words are created in subgroups and are
used for a limited time (cf. Kotsinas, 1994). The study of sound
symbolism naturally leads to the study of processes of language
development: How do words and sounds enter language or disappear from
language?
Phonesthemes vary in regard to productivity. The question of
productivity also involves the issue of production of new expressions vs.
understanding of such expressions. Sound symbolic neologisms are not
created all the time, but are created now and then. But when they are
created, they are easily understood by the listener; nonsense words can be
interpreted almost immediately.
Onomatopoeia and other sound symbolism are probably driving forces in
etymological development (and some claim they were so in the genesis of
language).
The general framework has to include a view of language as a dynamic
phenomenon with components of different dignity for different functions.
Sound symbolism is always possibly present, but new expressions (words
or phonesthemes) can be seen as floating in and out of language. Whether
or not they are actually ‘‘in language’’ depends on situation, stylistic
context, time span under study and geographical area studied.
26
The description and explanation of sound symbolic phenomena is related
to the question of universality. If there are universals in (different aspects
of) sound symbolism, this is compatible with innateness of sound
symbolism.
Many of the above mentioned points are relevant for most aspects of
language, but perhaps more typically so for onomatopoeia and other
sound symbolism, which are often more productive and universal. This
leads back to the first question of their status in language. Other sound
symbolism and onomatopoeia are different from other expressions,
considering some of the points mentioned above (productivity and
universality). But, above all, they are different because of the nonarbitrary dimension.
The dimensions of the framework are:
1) universality - language specificity
2) innateness
3) degree of conventionalization
4) productivity
5) centrality in language (historically, genetically, frequentially)
6) types of context determination
and they can be related9 in the following way:
universal
innate
centrality
productivity
not innate
conventional
conventionalization
type of context
determination
actual sound
symbolic meaning
language specific
Figure 1.3 A framework model for sound symbolism.
9The arrows in the model in figure 1.3 stand for different types of relationships, which
are spelled out in the text below.
27
The model in figure 1.3 shows the following: Assuming that sound
symbolism is central in language, this fact is compatible with both
innateness and non-innateness of sound symbolism. If it is innate it must
be universal and if it is not innate it is language specific (or universal due
to pure chance). In both cases new expressions can be produced, based on
innate capacity and phonesthemes which are pre-existing because of
innateness or because of convention. Naturally there are no innate forms
that are unaffected by convention, and therefore universals, like i
connected to smallness, are not absolute. Smallness does not implicate i
and i does not implicate smallness. Language specific expressions can be
said to be created by convention while universal expressions are affected
by convention.
Context affects the meaning of all expressions. The meaning potentials of
both the language specific conventional clusters like kl- ('sound',
'talking', 'wetness', 'adhesion', 'shortwide form' and 'pejorative') and
more universal phonesthemes like i (smallness, high pitch, light) are
disambiguated by context (phonesthemic, situational, etc.).
A lexical description of sound symbolism in Swedish is presented in
chapters 4 and 5. The lexical description, which shows the meaning
potentials for consonant clusters, treats sound symbolism as a part of
language and not as an exception. The description is a basis for
predictions of sound symbolism (chapter 8). It does not claim
universality. The explanatory model of chapter 2, which draws on the
above discussion and describes in detail the nature of the motivated
relation between expression and meaning of sound symbolic words, is,
however, easily relatable to many languages.
1.10 Expression and content of sound symbolism
Before I continue with the presentation of more concrete results obtained
by various linguists, I will make some comments about the expressions
and contents of onomatopoeia and other sound symbolism, i.e. phonemes,
sounds, phonological features, semantic fields, and level of semantic
categories.
28
1.10.1 Expression
The expressive side of onomatopoeia and other sound symbolism is
usually described in terms of phonemes, i.e. as belonging to the language
in question, or as sounds (phones) not belonging to the phonemic
inventory of the language in question. More seldom it is described in
terms of some kind of phonological or phonetic features.
In this presentation the phonemes are written as in the literature, but one
has to keep in mind that phonemes are relative to the phoneme system of
the language under consideration.
1.10.2 Content
In terms of content, especially if one is interested in similarities between
languages, it is convenient to work with semantic fields (Trier, 1934,
Lehrer, 1974) and semantic features. When dealing with certain kinds of
onomatopoeia, this is not so important; dogs sound about the same in
different countries, so different expressions can be fairly
straightforwardly compared. Interjections, on the other hand, often
express different aspects of human emotions and are therefore often more
difficult to compare.
While an expression such as aj (ouch) can probably be translated fairly
easily into other languages, many other exclamations are probably better
described with semantic components in relation to a semantic field, rather
than just translated to the nearest synonym. E.g. ohoj (ahoy) has an
expression with a similar content (EwE ) in Ososo, but this is not used to
adults. Schas (shoo) in Icelandic has a special expression when directed to
sheep (hau hau instead of sch). Hoppsan (whoops) in Slovenian is
translated differently depending on whether the surprise is experienced in
a negative or positive way (Oho: and Oi ).
1.10.3 Expression and content in different analyses
It is often difficult to compare the results obtained by different linguists
because of different levels of analytic semantic categories. The categories
can be very broad, e.g. things and appearances (Jespersen, 1922 a) or
more narrow, e.g. color (Samarin, 1978). Also, the categories differ
from one linguist to another. In the context of onomatopoeia and other
sound symbolism it is difficult but perhaps desirable to strive towards a
29
base level à la Brown (1958). Bolinger (1950) is of the opinion that the
level of specificity determines which morpheme analysis is made. ‘‘The
lower the specificity of meaning, the larger is the number of forms that
may be subsumed under one morpheme.’’ As an example of this, he gives
Nida's characterization of the 'suffix' /-´r/ i hammer, ladder, spider,
otter, badger, and water as having some sort of 'grammatical meaning'.
In spite of these difficulties I will try to compare the semantic
categorizations of different linguists, especially those who have done a
more extensive analysis.
The most elaborated taxonomy for onomatopoeia and other sound
symbolism is Jespersen's (1922 a). He describes it as ‘‘a preliminary
enumeration of the most obvious classes, with a small fraction of the
examples ... collected.’’ The classes are:
1. direct imitation, e.g. splash, klonk (onomatopoeia)
2. originator of the sound, e.g. cuckoo, or nicknames of nations from
recurring words.
3. movement (inseparable from sound), e.g. flicker, snatch, slide
4. things and appearances (this seems to be form and light), e. g. ‘‘ a
thick stick, a knot of wood, a bit of food, a protuberance, a small
hill’’; gloom, light, dunkel
5. states of mind, e.g. grunt, sulky, also pejoratives, e.g. bosh
6. size and distance, e.g. teeny
7. length and strength of words and sounds; this gives an emotional
effect, e.g. Danish langsommelig or Hungarian short words for commands
and long words for entreaty; the category also mirrors perfective, plural,
distance in time and space.
A few points of criticism of Jespersen's taxonomy are the following:
1) The basis of division is not homogeneous. The basic principle is
semantic, but how this is applied is also open to discussion. The main
critique is, however: a) category 4 is a very broad semantic category, it
covers almost everything. I believe Jespersen wants to emphasize the
interpretation of visual perception. If so, then auditory perception ought
to be treated in the same way, as things and appearances; b) class 7 is the
result of a categorization based on form and not on content.
30
2) The categories are not mutually exclusive, either empirically (many
words can be placed under both 1 and 3) or, analytically. Category 7 has
several types of content which characterize other categories, e.g.
'distance' and 'emotional effect').
3) The categories are not exhaustive. It is, for example, evident that there
is sound symbolism in the semantic spheres of 'wetness' and 'dryness'.
The categories suggested in this thesis (see chapter 2) agree on some
points with those of Jespersen though they are a bit more detailed. The
category 'things and appearances' takes up examples which would be
classified as 'form' and 'light' by me. The class of 'pejoratives' of the
present thesis falls under Jespersen's 'states of mind'. The category
'originator of the sound' is just a normal extension of meaning from Act
to Actor, (e. g. sökande (pres. part). – sökande (noun), (see Malmgren,
1988), which also applies to words which are not sound symbolic in any
way. Jespersen's last category does not have a correspondence in this
thesis but is interesting and deals with, e.g. ‘‘the emotional value of some
'mouth-filling' words’’, e.g. evig – evinderlig (eternal), vex – aggravate
and slang words like splendidious for splendid.
None of the authors below has tried to relate the categories which they
have found to each other, in order to explain, other than partially, the
phenomena of sound symbolism. In contrast, one important aim of this
thesis is to give an explanatory model for the semantic categories that
reoccur in sound symbolism in Swedish.
1.10.4 Results - data from different authors
The results presented in this section are primarily second-hand data, a
large part of them from the authors discussed in 1.1-1.8. These data
arrived at by earlier linguists will be summarized, without any evaluation.
Therefore, this section is a guide to what sounds and meanings different
linguists have studied. Comparisons between the authors are difficult for
several reasons; e.g. Bolinger claims there is an unclear boundary
between neutral and affective morphemes, Wescott includes the whole of
allolanguage, others have studied contrast, etc.
None of the authors has claimed to give a complete inventory of sound
symbolism, usually they are e.g. simply illustrating an argument.
31
Sometimes they just mention sound symbolic contents without giving
examples of the relevant sounds or sound combinations.
Table 1 Phonesthemic sounds and meanings of different authors.
Examples are given in regular spelling except for some IPA-symbols. The
language described is English if nothing else is written.
Bolinger (1950):
flmoving light
sound
gl-
content
phenomena
of
light
fl-
phenomena
of
movement
fl-
movement in air
gl-
unmoving
sl-
smoothly wet
kr-
noisy impact
skr-
grating impact or
light
itr
intermittent
ow
steady
sn-
breath-noise
Er
intense
sn-
quick
kr-
bent
-amble
locomotion
sn-
creep
-ust
surface
d J-
up-and-down-
-usty
old
sound
or
formation
separation
movement
movement
-lessness
indifference
b-
i
diminutive
-E
violent
-utter
discontinuity
-E´
big light or noise
-ash
hit,
-awns
quick
-im (´ )
small light or
fragments
tw-
twisting
st-
arrest
motion
sp-t
rush of liquid
-U m
str-p
line
-E t( ´ )
movement
movement
noise
having
clumsy
particled
movement
breadth
st-nt
dull impact
piece of
performance
Humboldt (1836/1907, German)
sk
swift
sound
content
-ump
awkward,
st-
firmness
n-
sharp
Bloomfield (1933):
w-
random
sound
u
hollow and dark
movement
heavy
content
32
cutting
movement
Rhodes (1994):
Classifiers:
sound
content
st-
1 dimensional
(stick, staff, stem)
str-
1 dimensional
(string, strand, strip)
flexible
fl-
2 dimensional
(flap, flat, floor)
S/sk -
2 dimensional, flexible
(sheet,
n-
3 dimensional
(knob, knot, node, nut)
sp-
cylindrical
(spool, spine, spike)
dr-/tr-
liquid
(drink, drain, trickle, trough)
scarf)
Paths:
sound
content
tr-/dr-
simple
(track, trip, drive, drag)
p-/b-
‘‘anchored’’
(push, pop, bump, bounce)
j-/ tS -
short
(jerk, jiggle, jagged, chop)
w-
back and forth
(wag, wiggle, wobble)
p-
abrupt
(pop, ping, peep)
b-
abrupt, loud onset
(boom, bang, beep)
bl-
loud, air-induced sound
(blat, blast, blab)
kl-
abrupt
(clank, click, clip, clop)
r-
irregular
y
loud, vocal tract noise
(yell, yap, yak)
Q-
low pitch, slow onset
(thump,
pl-
abrupt onset (plink, plop,
onset
onset
onset
(rip, roar, roll)
thud)
plunk)
kr-
abrupt
tS-
irregular
onset
w-
poorly resolvable onset
(whiz, whack, wham)
z-
poorly resolvable onset
(zip, zing, zap, zoom)
dr-
liquid
(drip, drain, drop, drizzle)
sl-
liquid
(slop, slush)
fl-
liquid
(flow, flush, flood)
m-
liquid
(mud, mush, mire, marsh)
onset
33
(creak,
crack,
crunch)
(chirp,
cheep,
chatter)
Plato:
(sounds and meanings discussed
in Cratylos, on Greek))
Malkiel (1978):
reduplication
disorder,
form
content
+vowel
confusion,
r
movement
i
sound
process
change
content
rubbish,
thrash
all fineness (it
can
ph, ps, s, z
penetrate
everything)
Jespersen (1918):
everything
sound
content
similar to
m
roundness
airstreams
d, t
l
binding
and
standing
still
Jespersen (1922 a):
no sounds
content
direct imitation
originator of
the sound
movement
things and
appearances
states of mind
size and
distance
length and
strength of
words and
sounds
gliding
movement
gl
something
sticky
n-
inside (it is
pronounced
inside the
mouth)
a
size
(largeness?)
e (eta)
length
o
roundness
(long?)
Sapir (1921):
sound
process
reduplication
content
plurality,
Wescott (1975): (content is often
not mentioned)
repetition,
sound
customary
uw
emotive
z
‘‘an
distribution,
activity,
increase of size,
added
content
unusual
semantic
intensity,
function’’
continuance
‘‘sound
repetition’’
34
‘‘sound
thick, coarse,
alternation’’
soft
‘‘allolinguistic
dull, loud,
prefix’’
indistinct
‘‘pentestheme’’
coward,
or
substance
noise
failure
deceiving
past tense, past
Householder (1946)
participle
no
content
deficient
dislike
some desirable
destruction
quality
sounds
in
projection
protuberance
(short
Sigurd, B. (1965) (Swedish):
and
roundish)
sound
meaning
collectives:
fj-
pejorative
or pile,
fn-
pejorative
cluster or knot,
pj-
pejorative
large
-ms
pejorative
shapeless
-mp
pejorative
indefinite
-sk
pejorative
number
-b(e)l
pejorative
-m(e)l
pejorative
heap
piece,
or
amount
Some generalizations
Some phonesthemes are the same in English and Swedish, e.g. fl‘‘phenomena of movement’’, e.g. flicker, flutter; fladdra, flaxa, while
others are different in English and Swedish, e.g. English: fl-‘‘moving
light’’ e.g. flicker, gl- ‘‘unmoving light’’, e.g. gleam, and Swedish bl-,
gn-, e.g. blänka, gnistra ‘‘light’’ (not to mention the discrepancies
between different analysts of English). Therefore, there is not complete
universality of expression on the phoneme level, since for example
English does not use the cluster gn- for light phenomena (it is not even a
consonant cluster in English).
35
There are sound symbolic contents in some languages which do not occur
in Swedish, e.g. in the field of color. This indicates that all sound
symbolic contents are not the same in all languages. On the other hand,
size (diminutive) stands out for itself since it seems to occur in almost all
languages – and in a similar phonetic form (Ultan, 1978).
The categories on the content side of the lists above can be summarized as
belonging to the following semantic fields. This is one possible
classification, mainly with a departure in the senses:
Hearing
sound, noise (dull, loud, indistinct, big, small, rushing liquid)
Vision
light (small, big, moving, dark)
Touch
surface structure or substance (thick, coarse, soft)
Movements
(random, twisting, swift, locomotion, up and down, quick, violent; or
stop)
Forms
(bent, line having breadth, projection or protuberance, round, hollow)
Mind
attitude, emotive (indifference, dislike)
Pejorative
(old, awkward, heavy, coward, failure, deceiving, deficient, clumsy,
disorder, confusion, rubbish, thrash)
Size
diminutive
augmentative (increase in size, added intensity)
Number
collectives (heap or pile, cluster or knot, indefinite number)
intermittent (distribution in space, plurality, repetition, discontinuity)
Various
liquid
steady, firmness
destruction (hit, fragments, sharp cutting)
inside
tense (past tense, past participle)
piece of performance
unusual semantic function
36
Three of the features are perceptive: 'hearing', 'vision' and 'touch'. Taste
and smell, however, do not occur. Perception of 'movement' is often cooccurring with perception of sound, a contiguity relationship (cf.
discussion of Hinton, Nichols and Ohala (1994) in 1.11). 'Form' is
likewise, perceptually, closely connected with 'vision' and secondarily also
with 'touch' (cf. Brown, 1958).
The semantic category 'mind' (attitudes and emotions) is a category that
probably comes naturally and can be seen as indexically related to
expressions for dislike, etc. This may also be the connection to at least
some pejorative expressions. The size categories can be seen as iconically
related to speech sound (in accordance with Ohala, 1994).
It seems, from this overview of the literature, that the most common
semantic categories are related to the three senses hearing, vision, touch
(situated in the cortex of the human brain, in contrast with smell and
taste) or they are metaphorically, metonymically, indexically or iconically
related to the senses.
1.10.5 Experimental results
Sapir (1929), (who communicated with Jespersen on sound symbolism and
who wrote his master's thesis on J.G. Herder's (1772) "Essay on the
origin of speech") wrote about ‘‘latent expressive symbolism’’, a type of
relationship, e.g. in words like teeny and tiny, which is ‘‘directly
expressive of the difference in meaning’’. He conducted some
experiments. In one of them more than 500 subjects were asked to decide
which of the nonsense words mil and mal meant a large table and which
meant a small table. 80% agreed that mal is better suited to the large
table. An investigation by Bentley and Varon (1933) indicated that [a]
sounds are felt to be larger than [i] sounds in the proportion 4:1, and also
that [a] is rounder and [i] is more angular in the proportion 3:1 and [a] is
softer and [i] is harder in the proportion 2:1.
Sapir's experiments were further developed by Newman (1933). He tested
both vowels and consonants with respect to the small-large and the brightdark dimensions. His results were the following: vowels agree with
articulatory position (front-back:small-large); also consonants agree with
37
articulatory position (labial-dental: small-large); accentuation of vowels is
heavily in favor of largeness and darkness.
Newman (1933) also made a study of a Thesaurus with respect to the
categories of 'greatness', 'smallness', 'size' and 'littleness'. He did not,
however, find great support for sound symbolism here.
The subject of correspondence between meaning of speech sound
sequences and abstract graphic figures was investigated by Usnadze (1924)
and Köhler (1930). Two nonsense line drawings and two nonsense words
maluma and takete were presented to subjects who were asked to decide
which sound matched which drawing. The overwhelming majority
assigned maluma to the rounded figure and takete to the angular one. This
result has been shown for several other languages (Holland and
Wertheimer, 1964; Davis, 1961).
The longest series of experiments concerns the question of whether, and
to what degree, lexical oppositions in meaning bear any consistent lawful
relationship to the symbolic properties of sounds. Tsuru and Fries (1933)
initiated matching experiments, where verbal data in the manner of
Köhler's maluma study were used. Lists of pairs of opposites in two
different languages were prepared, e.g. big/small - gross/klein, and
presented orally. Subjects who knew only one of these languages were to
match the corresponding words. They succeeded with a certainty
exceeding chance. Other linguists have followed trying to eliminate the
semantic cues, e. g. by matching two languages that are both unknown to
the speakers. The results were less successful in these cases as no semantic
dimension could be available to the subject.
A recent continuation of these experiments was done by Lapolla (1994).
Since many of the earlier results have had methodological weaknesses he
started a new set of experiments, on tonal morphology in Mandarin
Chinese. The results show that there is a cross-linguistic tendency toward
associating acoustically acute1 0 segments with 'small' category words, and
acoustically grave1 1 segments with 'big' category words. These results are
explained with reference to the ‘‘frequency code’’ theory developed by
10high frequency energy
11low frequency energy
38
Ohala (1994). This theory implies that sound symbolism is a manifestation
of a larger ethological phenomenon that is also seen in the vocal
communication and certain facial expressions1 2 of other species. In
intonational communication of affect and in sound symbolic vocabulary
there are sound-meaning correlations where high F0 signifies smallness,
non-threatening attitude, desire for goodwill of the receiver, etc, whereas
low F0 conveys largeness, threat, self-confidence, and self-sufficiency.
The common connections between segments (consonants and vowels) with
low frequency energy1 3 and largeness and segments with high frequency
energy and smallness are also in accordance with the frequency code.
Wilde (1958), Müller (1960) and others have studied another area of
motivated expressions, namely the expressions of emotions. The present
thesis will not investigate this area, see however Abelin and Allwood
(1984). Wisseman (1954) studied the creation of onomatopoeic words
from noises. Various noises were presented to the subjects, who were not
able to observe how they were produced. They were then instructed to
invent or select names for the noises. The research design has been
criticized, e.g. Hörmann (1979), but it seems that vowels represented the
pitch and qualitative color feature of the noise: the i sound imitates a
light, spiky noise, the u sound a low dark noise. The number of syllables
in the invented words was not proportional to the length of the noise; it
reflected sections of the noise sequence. A noise with an abrupt beginning
was represented by a word beginning with a voiceless plosive p, t, k. A
gradually starting noise was described by a word beginning with s or ts.
Also Osgood (1962) studied (universal) phonetic symbolism. Osgood's
semantic differential (Osgood et al, 1957) testing the basic dimensions of
‘‘value’’, ‘‘strength’’ and ‘‘potency’’ has been widely used in testing
emotional content in words, also for phonetic symbolism. Nonsense
syllables were rated on the semantic differential. The results for
American and Japanese speakers were almost identical. For both groups
12The smile is connected with high F2 (and higher formant frequencies) since retracting
the corners of the mouth shortens the vocal tract and thus raises those frequencies.
13In consonants, voiceless obstruents have higher frequency than voiced, and dental,
alveolar, palatal and front velars have higher frequencies (of bursts and frication noise)
than labials and back velars. Dentals have higher frequencies of formant transitions than
labials. High front vowels have higher F2 and high back vowels the lowest F2.
39
front consonants (e. g. p) were more pleasant than back consonants (e.g.
g ); high frequency sounds were associated with smallness and impotence.
However, it seems that his semantic categories are too restricted and the
task of placing words/concepts on a 1–7 scale is not really feasible.
Symbolism of French vowels was studied by Chastaing (1958). i is treated
in association with acuteness, smallness, lightness, rapidity, and closeness.
Also consonantal oppositions were studied by Chastaing (1965, 1966).
Stops are hard, continuants soft, r is rough, strong, hard, etc. in contrast
to l which is smooth, weak, light-weighted, etc.
Fonagy (1963) compared i and u in Hungarian. In his investigations of
children and adults i was quicker than u for 94%, smaller for 88%,
prettier for 83%, friendlier for 82%, harder for 71 %, whereas u was
thicker for 98%, hollower and darker for 97%, sadder and blunter for
92%, more bitter for 86% and stronger for 80% . The responses to r
were that r was wild, pugnacious, manly, rolling, harder for the
overwhelming majority.
A recent study by Sereno (1994) concerned lexical organization.
Departing from the results of a lexical study concerning which vowels are
the most common in English verbs and nouns, a reaction time experiment
was performed. In this experiment the subjects categorized nouns and
verbs. The results showed that there was a connection between syntactic
class and phonological form in English. Verbs, with front vowels (which
are lexically most frequent) were recognized faster than verbs with back
vowels, while nouns with back vowels (which are lexically more frequent)
were recognized more quickly than nouns with front vowels. This
connection is independent of the frequency of the words. It is interesting
to note this distinction between front and back vowels. The distinction
between front and back vowels is perceptually salient and often also
occurring in size-sound symbolism.
Sereno (1994) thus proposes that noun/verb-categories and front/back
classification of vowels (i. e. acoustical-perceptual classification) are
organization principles of the lexicon and explicitly coded.
As we have seen, there has been quite a large amount of different kinds of
experimentation in this area. The tests, which have been commented upon
40
above, have mostly been concerned with isolated consonants (i. e. not with
consonant clusters) and vowels and, semantically, with contrasting ends on
a scale (semantic oppositions). The experiments of this thesis treat
Swedish (mostly) and more specifically the semantic value (not necessarily
in opposition to some other category) of initial consonant clusters.
1.11 Possible explanations of sound symbolism
The different explanations of sound symbolism are of varying types but
have often focussed on synaesthesia and proprioception and, generally, on
the question of a biological or non-biological base.
1.11.1 Miscellaneous explanations and
proprioception
Let us now further investigate some of the ideas concerning the nature of
the relations between meaning and expression in sound symbolism (cf. fig.
2.3). This discussion will then serve as a basis for a suggestion of an
explanatory model of sound symbolism to be presented in chapter 2.
Different explanations have been put forward by different linguists. Some
linguists like Publius Nigidius Figulus, 98–45 BC (according to Jespersen,
1922 a, p. 396), Fónagy (1963) or Peterfalvi (1965) have speculated on
the connection between articulatory movements and meaning. Nigidius
Figulus claimed that in pronouncing vos one puts forward one's lips and
sends out breath in the direction of the other person, while this is not the
case with nos1 4 (i.e. an indexical relation).
Peterfalvi (1965) claims that vowels articulated towards the exterior of
the body are judged to be ‘‘light’’ whereas those articulated towards the
interior of the body are judged to be ‘‘dark’’ because ‘‘the further you
penetrate the body, the darker it is there.’’ It seems that he is influenced
by sense analogy, i.e. the word dark can be used for different per ceptual
phenomena. Fonagy (1963) claims that various movements of the tongue
and the jaw bear likeness to different emotions.
These and similar theories connect articulation with meaning directly and
disregard the acoustic (or visual) link in a communicative situation. As
for the area of non-verbal communication, Fonagy's and Peterfalvi's
14This is of course not correct.
41
‘‘gestures’’ cannot even have an observer, if one excepts that front
articulations can be seen. However, there might be proprioception
involved.
Bolinger (1968) suggests the following metaphor: ‘‘the digital island floats
on an analog sea’’. Digital stands for consonants and vowels, which are
arbitrary, analogue stands for phenomena like prosody and gestures,
which are not completely arbitrary. ‘‘... now and then a bit of the
analogue sea washed over the digital island’’, e.g. when i stands for
smallness and o for largeness. ‘‘The size of the mouth cavity ... is matched
with the meaning’’. If there is something in this explanation, a number of
factors are left out, e.g. the acoustic link. The explanation is a bit better if
one compares the frequency of acoustic energy in i with that in o, or a,
which is connected with the size of the mouth cavity and other vocal tract
cavities. (see e.g. Jakobson, Fant, Halle, 1957).
Darwin (1872) proposes a possible explanation for sound symbolic words
related to emotions, e.g. disgust (related to 'pejorative'), and for
interjections. The explanation is based on the instinctive contractions of
facial muscles connected with a certain emotion. This type of explanation
would mean that pejoratives can be classified as indexical (cf. discussion
in chapter 2).
A recent investigation on the topic of universal sound symbolism in
deictic words was done by Traunmüller (1996). He found that pairs of
demonstratives in which there is a vocalic opposition have an advantage in
the struggle for existence in languages when F2' is higher in the proximal
than in the distal form; he also found that nasals are preferred in first
person pronouns while stops and other obstruents are preferred in second
person pronouns. He also offers explanations that involve affinities with
the association of pitch with size, the proprioceptive qualities of speech
sounds and oral pointing gestures.
1.11.2 Synaesthesia
Sometimes it is stated in passing that sound symbolism can be explained by
synesthesia, i.e. neurological connections between the sound side and the
semantic side of a word, morpheme or phonestheme, when the meaning is
in some way connected to one of the other senses, e.g. 'sight', 'touch' or
to categories perceived with several of the senses, e.g. 'form', 'surface
42
structure', 'movement'. (This resembles Müller's (1861) ‘‘ding dong
theory’’.)
Luria's (1977) patient, the mnemonist S. is a well known synesthete.
When he heard a tone vibrating with 50 cycles/second at 100 dB he saw a
brown stripe against a darker background with red tongues at the edges.
At the same time he experienced the taste of sweet-sour borsjtj. When he
heard [r] he always saw a ragged line. Persons with synaesthesia are
unusual, and the experiences vary from person to person (cf. e.g.
Cytowic, 1989).
Aristotle claimed that the senses were clearly separated from each other.
Newton, on the other hand, tried to find a numerical correlation between
e.g. the wave length of green light and a certain frequency of sound.
However, he could not find this.
The problems with an explanation in terms of synaesthesia are several.
According to Cytowic (1989) synaesthesia is an idiosyncratic
phenomenon, which varies between the persons who experience it.
Cytowic argues that ‘‘rather than being merely a more intense form of
metaphoric speech, one can look at cross-modal metaphor as an abstract,
linguistic derivative of the stuff of synaesthesia’’. Jakobson and Waugh
(1979), however, mention different findings of tendencies of the
correlation of speech sounds with colors: redness of a, yellowness and
whitishness of e and i and darkness of o and u.
According to Marks (1990) the synaesthetic connections do not vary too
much between the experiences of different persons. For example, the
frequency of the second formant of vowels can be related to black (dark)
and white (light) so that [u] has a low frequency and dark color while [i]
has a high frequency and light color.
In order to give a more convincing explanation, one would need to do it
in terms of neurophysiology. For example Freud (1891) suggested that
language could be represented in a ‘‘field’’ in the border area between the
temporal, parietal and occipital lobes, where all properties of the
perception of a thing were connected in a network (smell, taste, visual
appearance, sound, etc.)
43
Considering the apparent similarities between the semantic categories in
s y n a e s t h e s i a – color, form, motion, texture, luminescence,
dynamics (but also numbers, days of the week and months of the year,
moral judgements) – s e n s e a n a l o g i e s (sense analogies are
linguistic metaphors, e.g. the expressions dark tones, warm colors, cf.
Abelin, 1988) and s o u n d s y m b o l i s m , i.e. sense related categories,
one might hypothesize a common ground for synaesthesia on the one hand
and language phenomena like sense analogies and sound symbolism on the
other.
This is in agreement with Geschwind (1965, according to Cytowic, 1989):
language depends on stable intermodal associations, especially visualauditory and tactile-auditory. These are the most common modes of
synaesthesia. The relation between sound and meaning in sound
symbolism should then stand for a neurological connection; this can be
interpreted as an indexical relation since it is not iconic or conventional.
According to Cytowic (1989), there is behind synaesthesia a purely
neurological process which is connected to certain cell clusters. He studied
the blood flow to cortical association centra for vision-hearing-touch
during subjects synaesthetic experiences. He expected an increase in these
association centra but did not find such an increase. Instead, the
connections seemed to occur in the limbic system, which was studied by
introducing electric stimulation during operations. Cytowic argues that, in
some individuals, the developmentally earlier, ‘‘suppressed’’ limbic
system sometimes overrides the cortex and that the boundaries between
the senses then disappear.
Related to the issue of synaesthesia and language universals is the study of
verbs of perception in 50 languages by Viberg (1984). This study showed
that
there
are
implicational
universals
in
the
order:
SEE>HEAR>FEEL>TASTE>SMELL. That is, if a language has only one
verb of perception, the basic meaning is 'see'. If it has two, the basic
meanings are 'see' and 'hear' etc.
1.11.3
Other
explanations
neurological
and
biological
A specific, neurological explanation for why languages often represent
movement with the same sort of sound symbolic forms that they use for
44
the representation of non-linguistic sounds is found in Hinton, Nichols and
Ohala (1994): ‘‘ Certain rhythmic movements often directly produce
sound. But beyond that, the rhythms of sound and the rhythms of
movement are so closely linked in the human neural system that they are
virtually inseparable. This is illustrated in the very natural human
physical response to rhythmic music, in the forms of hand clapping, foot
tapping, dancing, rhythmical physical labor, etc. ... humans ... are also
capable of the reverse : translating rhythmic movements into sounds,
including sound-symbolic language forms.’’ (pp. 3-4) In other words, at
least part of ‘‘the sound symbolic feeling’’ is not something that one has
learned.
Related to the area of synaesthesia and sense analogy is the research area
of bimodal perception e.g. in the form of the McGurk effect (e.g.
Massaro et al 1993). Various experiments show how e.g. auditory
perception is influenced by e.g. visual or tactile perception, and points to
an interconnection of the senses. Which phonemes (or sound types) that
are perceived do not, then, depend purely on acoustic information but also
on information from other senses.
Ohala (e.g.1994) discusses the frequency code and offers a solution for
sound symbolism of diminutives and augmentatives. In contrast with
Brown (1958) his theory points to innateness through an ethologically
based, phonetically plausible theory for why sound symbolism exists in
language. He identifies a link between sound symbolism in vowels,
consonants, tones and intonation. The common factor is high-low F0 (of
tones and intonation), noise frequency (of obstruents) or F2 (of vowels
and sonorant consonants). High frequency is connected to smallness, low
frequency to largeness. However, in Swedish there are several examples
of initial [p] usually denoting smallness in spite of being grave ([p] has
noise at low frequencies), e.g. pipa, pil, pilla, pilt, pingla, pinne, pippi,
(however followed by [i], which has F2 at a high frequency). Another
possible explanation of why [p] can denote smallness is the fact that [p] has
weak noise.
Clark and Clark (1977) discuss different kinds of categories, perceptual,
e.g. color, shape, spatiality, cognitive categories, e.g. number, negation,
evaluation, cause and effect, time, and social categories, e.g. kinship
terms, personal pronouns.
45
1.11.4 Non-biological explanations
A non-biological explanation of size-sound symbolism is offered by
Brown (1958), who claims that associations between, e.g., sound and size
are simply learned through experience. Large objects usually produce
dark (low frequency) sounds when pushed or moved in certain ways,
whereas small objects produce bright (high frequency) sounds, (i. e. the
relation is indexical). Thus, universality does not have to imply
innateness. Brown (1958) also anticipates the studies on multimodal
perception and writes that perception does not have to be connected to a
particular receptor but is a matter of the whole body.
Lakoff and Johnsson (1980), explain part of sound symbolism within the
framework of their theory for metaphors. Underlying sound symbolism is
the ‘‘conduit metaphor’’ defining a spatial relationship between form and
content: ‘‘linguistic expressions are containers’’, and their meanings are
the content of those containers. We expect small containers to have small
contents, large containers to have large contents. Therefore: more form is
more content. Examples of this is reduplication: He ran and ran and ran,
He is very, very tall or lengthening: He is bi-i-i-i-i-ig.
Diffloth (1994) goes against mainstream work on sound symbolism with
unusual data and unusual explanations. He shows data from Bahnar, a
language of Vietnam, in which i expresses largeness and a expresses
smallness. He claims that there is nevertheless an iconic basis for this – in
proprioceptive sensation. He concludes that iconicity can be both
physiologically motivated and culturally relative at the same time. From
this follows, he proposes, that iconic patterns, being language specific,
must be described in the grammars of language. He criticizes current
linguistic models for not being able to describe a direct relation between
phonetics and semantics. Also, phonetics is unable to represent the
phonetic parameters needed for Bahnar, e.g. perceived size of the tongue
in the oral cavity. He proposes an aesthetic component of the grammar.
His discussions on a proprioceptive explanation are very interesting but
seem isolated in comparison with the elaborate Frequency Code theory of
Ohala (see 1.10.5). Nevertheless, I think, it is preferable to give an
explanation of Bahnar’s size-sound symbolism rather than discarding it as
an exception. A multimodal model for sound symbolism should
preferably incorporate the facts of Bahnar, i. e. proprioception.
46
Hamano (1994) has studied palatalization in Japanese sound symbolism.
Palatalization of alveolar stops and fricatives is associated with
‘‘childishness’’ and ‘‘immaturity’’. He connects this to studies on language
acquisition reporting palatalization as one of the universal characteristics
of early stages of children's language acquisition. Palatalization is also
reported as one of the commonest features of baby-talk, i.e. child directed
speech (Snow and Ferguson, 1977). A possible explanation of the Swedish
pejorative clusters pj-, bj-, fj- which do not fit into a sense related
pattern (see chapters 2 and 4) could be that they have another origin, in
child directed speech. Considering Hamanos findings these clusters can be
interpreted as marked (they are unusual), rather than having their origin
in interjections. Hamanos explanation is basically indexical (causal).
A study of the frequency of Swedish consonant clusters in running text
(Stenström, 1984) shows that the seven most infrequent initial consonant
clusters are fj-, bj-, pj-, mj-, spl-, vr-, nj- (where nj- is the most
unusual). In other words, bj-, pj- and fj- are among the most infrequent
clusters, also in running text.
A pragmatic explanation for a part of sound symbolism, namely
vocatives, is given by Jacobsen (1994). In Nootka languages there seem to
be two main sound-symbolic tendencies that shape vocative forms:
saliency and brevity. Saliency means that the word contains a prominent
syllable that will attract the attention of the addressee. For example, nonhigh vowels are more salient because they are intrinsically more intense;
falling pitch is argued to be more salient because it involves a rapid
change in pitch. The notion of saliency can, however, be criticized. Even
if non-high vowels are acoustically more intense, they are perceived as
having the same strength as high vowels. Also, a raising F0 can be as
quick as a falling.
The discussion of different explanations of sound symbolism is continued
in 8.3 where the arguments are related to the findings of the lexical and
experimental studies of this thesis.
47
2 Theoretical framework
2.1 General considerations
The preceding chapter was an overview of terminological issues and
general questions concerning onomatopoeia and other sound symbolism.
This chapter will penetrate further into the relation between meaning and
expression in sound symbolism. There will be an attempt at an explanation
of the relation between expression and meaning, with the aid of the
concepts 'icon' and 'index'.
In this thesis the standpoint is that language in important ways is a
psychological phenomenon. The semantics of lexical analysis is therefore
not concerned with referents, but with reference: correspondence between
linguistic form and external data. For a discussion on this subject, see
Allwood and Andersson (1976).
The validity of the model presented, for example concerning the
explanations or the number and types of semantic categories provided, will
be supported in terms of coherence, e.g. recurrent relations between
expression and content in the analyses, and by consensus, between subjects
in the experiments.
2.2 Static-dynamic, conventionality and arbitrariness
The vocabulary of language is both static and dynamic (in the sense of
undergoing change). Some parts are less static than other parts, e.g. sound
symbolic words can be less static in both a diachronic and a microgenetic
perspective (i.e., during the development of language in a situation) than
more arbitrary words are, since sound symbolic words can easily be
created. The phonesthemes, however, are stable and sound symbolic
words are created with the assistance of phonesthemes.
Thus, onomatopoeic or other sound symbolic neologisms come and go, but
the phonesthemes, out of which neologisms can be created, are stable over
49
longer periods of time. An example (concerning the pejorative fj-) from
SAOB (Ordbok över svenska språket, utgiven av Svenska Akademien) is
the word fjåka (now, if existing at all, only in some dialects) which meant
'våp, narr, tok' (silly or crazy person). The first written instance is from
1732; there are similar words with similar meanings in Norwegian dialects.
The origin of the word is described as "unclear". In other words, fjåka is no
longer existing in standard Swedish, but the phonestheme fj- 'pejorative'
seems to have been the same in 1732 as today; the phonesthemes are more
stable than the words. Another more recent example is the word slobb. It
was created for a newspaper article (around 1985) and describes the sound
of porridge landing in a bowl. The same expression may be created again in
another context. One phonestheme used is the phonestheme sl- 'wetness'.
In words, the connection between expression and content can be described
as arbitrary or motivated. The motivated words can be + or - conventional;
neologisms are -conventional. In reality a word cannot be completely nonconventional because the phonesthemes of sound symbolic neologisms are
not. As discussed in connection with the model shown in figure 1.3,
language specific expressions are created by convention while expressions
emanating from innate (universal) processes are affected by convention.
+conventional
arbitrary
door
motivated
shriek
-conventional
iiiiik
The field of interest in this thesis consists of the motivated expressions,
both + and - conventional. Arbitrariness is a precondition for
conventionalization. Arbitrary words are thus always conventional while
motivated words can be conventionalized or not. In language there can not
be non-conventional arbitrary words. Somebody can invent words that fit
50
into this square but nobody would understand them. The present claim is
that the non-conventional can be understood if it is motivated. In some
cases non-conventional words can be said to be constructed out of
conventional phonesthemes, e.g. the expression fnölp is constructed for
something that is 'silly' (i.e. 'pejorative').
The perspective on words in this thesis is synchronic, not diachronic. This
is also the case as concerns semantic relations and extension of meaning.
Language is not static, but in the microperspective static enough.
2.3 Semantic analysis
2.3.1 Conceptions of meaning
Meaning is more or less context dependent, especially so in the reference of
a lexeme. The meanings of concrete nouns like horse or spoon are less
context dependent than pronouns like he or it.
Lexemes can be claimed to have a central, intensional meaning. It is
possible to describe this meaning as prototypes, meaning components or
distinctive features. One can also make a distinction between core meaning
and the vaguer emotive and associative meanings and sometimes between
denotation and connotation. Another conception, proposed by Allwood
(1989) is 'meaning potential'. This means, briefly, that e.g. a word form has
a union of potential meanings, one of which is decided on by different
contextual conditions. Homonymy only has to be resorted to in word
classification where the different meanings are not relatable via semantic
relations like metonymy or metaphor.
The concept of meaning potential is useful also in the analysis of
phonesthemes, and will be used in this thesis. A certain consonant cluster
can have one or several meanings. Where there are several meanings many
of these are usually relatable to each other, e.g. light – form letting through
light – looking – gaze – reflecting smooth surface – movement on such a
surface (gl-), which all can be characterized as metonymical (indexical).
Other examples are sound – wetness – adhesion – pejorative (kl-) and
51
wetness – smooth surface – quick movement – long thin form (sl-). (Some
of these are described in more detail in chapter 4.6.)
The meanings of onomatopoeic and other sound symbolic neologisms are
very context sensitive. What does, for example, the word slasli (which is
newly created) mean? Well, something having to do with wetness. If we
get more context, like in the test matching columns of neologisms, where
each column has a special meaning, (cf. table 7.8), subjects correctly pair
word columns with meanings. The results depend on the possibility to
compare the words in the different columns and compare these with the
different suggested meanings. We get an effect from phonological and
semantic context.
Emotive and associative meanings are often not considered part of the core
meaning of words. I will not adopt this standpoint but I claim that
associative/emotive meanings belong to the meaning potential of words and
phonesthemes. I claim that, apart from the lexicalized emotive/associative
meanings which individual lexemes may have, there are also phonesthemes
as parts of individual lexemes, e. g. sl- meaning wetness in e. g. slaska
(splash), slafsa (squelch), slabba (splash), slem (slime).
2.3.2 Semantic features and semantic fields
The status of different types of semantic units, i.e. how concepts are best
described, has been the subject of a long debate (see Allwood and
Andersson (1976), Allwood (1989), Kukkonen (1989), Lehrer (1974),
Miller and Johnsson Laird (1976) and Lyons (1977)). The most important
units proposed are essences (defined by necessary and sufficient
conditions) discussed e.g. by Aristotle and semantic features or
components, discussed by e.g. Katz and Postal (1964), Leech (1969). The
semantic features can be of different kinds, e.g. in the form of a restricted
number of primitive (universal) distinctive features with +, – values (i. e.
meaning components) or more generally: features found empirically in
semantic analyses and which are possible to decompose further (i. e.
semantic features or meaning postulates). Meaning components and
semantic features have also proven to be a useful tool in systematic
52
lexicology. In this thesis are used semantic features, i.e. features found
empirically in the semantic analysis, but not meaning components, in the
sense of a restricted number of apriori primitive features.
Semantic fields can be characterized, using semantic features, as consisting
of words (lexemes) with related meanings which have at least one common
semantic feature in common and are analyzed through meaning
components or semantic features. Fields can be used to show paradigmatic
relations between the words (Lehrer, 1974) or syntagmatic relations
(Porzig, 1934).
Examples of semantic fields relevant for this study are 'pejoratives' and
'form'. The aim was not to do a semantic field analysis. Instead fields and
properties of fields will be used in the discussions, e.g. sometimes the field
of 'pejoratives' is discussed, sometimes the feature [PEJORATIVE] and
sometimes words like fjantig (fussy) or fjollig (foolish). In this way
different authors and different informants who have given information
related to semantic fields at different levels of abstraction could be included
in the discussion .
One aim of this thesis is to give a psychologically valid description and the
principle assumed here is that the appropriate level is the one that works
best in the analysis. During data collection the root morpheme level was
preferred. The meanings of roots were later, in the analysis, decomposed
into semantic features.
Since some of the studies concern a number of words with similar (and
vague) content, within a restricted number of semantic categories, which
are translated into different languages, it is helpful to work with semantic
fields, and semantic features. An example: when translating to an unknown
language, and with informants of varying proficiency in Swedish (or
English) it is difficult to ask for word to word translations of e.g. words like
oh, ah, whoops (to take some interjections) but easier to ask for words with
meaning of positive surprise or negative mood etc.
53
It can also be the case that an expression, for example for pain, can be
translated differently in different contexts. For example there is, in Ososo, a
special expression of pain for when somebody has died.
Other interjections, like atjo (for a sneeze) are easily translatable word for
word, e.g. [haptsI] in Hungarian and [Itçími] in Nigerian Ososo.
2.4 Basic relations between expression and content
The field of interest which was analyzed here can be defined as
"synchronously motivated verbal signs". By this definition non-verbal signs
such as gestures, sign-posts etc are excluded. For practical reasons the
greater part of prosody such as sentence intonation, phrase intonation etc
was also excluded.
Sound symbolism can be divided into three types:
Free morphemes:
Non-free morphemes:
1) onomatopoeic
2) expressive interjections
3) sound symbolic phonesthemes
(these can be part of 1) and 2))
The basic distinctions between these three groups are:
1) onomatopoeia is mainly iconic, e.g. mjau, plask
2) expressive interjections are mainly indexical, e.g. aj, atjo
3) sound symbolic phonesthemes are motivated, but not so clearly iconic
or indexical, e.g. glänsa, fjanta
The three groups can be characterized in more detail:
1) Onomatopoeia is realized in complete free morphemes e.g. mjau, voff.
Onomatopoeia is a verbal imitation of any sound. The relation between
expression and content has an element of arbitrariness. The meaning is a
54
(sort of) sound. The expression side is more or less conventionalized, that
is, adjusted to the phonology of the language in question.
The expression has universal traits with a language specific superstructure
which is affected by the phonology of the individual language. The relation
between expression and content is basically iconic. (The sound of the
rooster can serve as an illustration; it is (with informants' transcriptions) in
Swedish kuckeliku, in German kikeriki, in Serbocroatian kukuricu,
Macedonian kukurica, Italian chicchiricchi, Syrian kuckylyku, Urdu
kokelongkong). Figure 2.1 illustrates onomatopoeia:
sound
step1:
iconic relation
linguistic form
conventionalization
(step2:
linguistic expression)
Figure 2.1 Schematic illustration1 of onomatopoeia.
2) Expressive interjections are also realized in complete free morphemes
e.g. atjo, aj, oj. The relation between expression and content is nonarbitrary. The expression can be described as standing in an indirect causal
relation to the content which is a bodily or mental reaction. The expression
is more or less conventionalized and there are universal traits in the
expressions, naturally with a language specific superstructure. Its base is
indexical. Figure 2.2 can illustrate:
1
Linguistic form is a phonetic form associated with a meaning.
55
em ot ion , b od ily r e act ion
st ep 1 :
in d exical r elat ion
expression (cry, i.e.
sound)
step 2:
iconic r elation
linguistic form
st ep 3 :
con v en tion alizat ion
lin gu ist ic
exp r ession
Figure 2.2 Schematic illustration of expressive interjections.
That is, a bodily reaction produces a sound, e.g a sneeze or a scream. That
scream etc. is then verbally imitated (like in onomatopoeia) and then
conventionalized into a word of a language.
The more vivid the connection between e.g. an emotion and its verbal
expression is, the stronger the causal component is. But the form of the
linguistic sign is not an icon of the emotion etc.! The causal relation is
interesting insofar as the expression could not be just any kind of
expression.
Probably many signs are a combination of iconicity, indexicality and
symbol. Atjo is a good example of a word were the indexical relation (a
natural relation) is clear. The sound of the sneeze is imitated and then
conventionalized - the symbol for a sneeze differs in different languages.
The word aj is not so clearly indexical; the connection with pain is not as
obvious as the connection between the sneeze and the sound of a sneeze,
even though the sound for pain can be seen as dependent on the shape of
the mouth cavity while, e.g. one is screaming from pain. The mouth is
opened wide, causing an [a]-like sound in all languages (see Darwin,
1872).
56
3) Phonesthemes are realised systematically within complete (traditional)
morphemes, e.g. fl- in flicker, flutter. In sound symbolic phonesthemes the
relation between expression and content is of a type which is experienced
as motivated by the typical speaker of a language. (In a more compelling
degree than the feeling, e.g. by English speakers that horse is a better
expression than häst, for that four-legged animal.) The expression side is
language specific, and conventional, but the content side has universal
traits.
The meaning of a phonestheme is experienced by the speaker/listener as
somehow corresponding to the expression. The main problem is to describe
the type of relation that exists between, e.g. fl- and 'quick or strong
movement'. What the relation might be, in detail and in relation to iconicity
and indexicality, is discussed in sections 2.5 and 2.6.
2.5 The nature of phonesthemes
First there is the problem with onomatopoeic phonesthemes like fr- in e.g.
frusta or gn- in e.g. gnägga, gnälla. In the kind of analysis undertaken in
this chapter these words ought to belong to category 1, onomatopoeic
words, since they are iconic (even though in a word like gnägga it is
conventionalized almost beyond recognition). However, I have preferred to
put the onomatopoeic phonesthemes in category 3, even though they are
not problematic semiotically, because they are often metaphorically
connected with other phonesthemes. Gn- which is 'sound', like in (gnissla,
gnälla) is metaphorically connected with gn- : 'way of talking' (like in
gnata, gnola, gnälla). Here is again the problem of distinguishing meanings
(which also holds for other morphology) since 'way of talking' really
belongs to the same meaning potential as 'sound' does. In this analysis,
however, 'way of talking' is isolated since it is both frequent and
interesting.
The following can be stated and should be considered in a model for
phonesthemes:
57
1. Some sounds/sound combinations are (judged to be) better suited for
some (types of) meanings, within a given language or for many languages.
2. Some meanings are better suited for being expressed with some of these
sounds/sound combinations.
Why? It isn´t plausible that the only explanation is that a number of words
happen to have similar phonetic structures linked to meanings and that this
"tie" lately has become productive, which would suggest that
diachronically the phonesthemes would be arbitrary. In that case the
meaning dimensions (see chapter 4) would not be so few and they ought to
be more difficult to relate to each other. The relatable meaning dimensions
can be structure internal proofs (coherence).
The expression has universal traits (especially if the meaning of the
phonestheme can be related to onomatopoeia.) The content of the
phonesthemes is partly universal and partly language specific because of an
interaction between e.g. innateness on the one hand and environment on the
other (see discussion on explanations of sound symbolism in 1.11)
The phonesthemes that appear from the lexical analysis (chapter 4) are
preliminary until either there have appeared neologisms that support them,
the more the better, or until they have found support in tests.
Figure 2.3 can illustrate the problem of explaining other sound symbolism,
i.e., phonesthemes which are neither iconic or indexical at first sight.
meaning
?-relation
linguistic expression
Figure 2.3 Schematic illustration of other sound symbolism.
58
There is a motivated relation between meaning and form, but the question
is: How should the relation illustrated by the arrow best be described?
The analogous representation for a conventional, arbitrary sign would be:
meaning
purely conventional relation
linguistic expression
Figure 2.4 Schematic illustration of a conventional, arbitrary sign.
without an arrow, showing that the form is not motivated by the meaning
(see figure 2.4). What exactly does then the arrow represent in
phonesthemes? It can be stated that it represents an ordinary speakers'
intuition that the form is motivated by the content. In section 1.11 it was
shown how this intuition can be explained in different ways, and it was
suggested that the relation is in fact indexical or iconic. It can be concluded
that most of the explanations discussed in 1.11 support the idea that the
relation is indexical, iconic or a combination of both.
2.6. Considerations for a model
As concerns more specified explanations an eclectic approach to
explanation of sound symbolism would be to say that most of the
explanations discussed in 1.11 could be valid, either simultaneously or for
different types of sound symbolism.
However, some explanations seem more plausible than others. One basic
distinction is that between innateness and learning. Innateness can be of at
least three different kinds. It can mean: 1) that there are innate abilities by
nature of biological endowment, 2) that there are innate specific
59
predispositions for the ability, which develops in a certain way over time,
in interaction with the environment, and 3) that there are innate nonspecific predispositions, the development of which heavily relies on the
environment. Learning is compatible with the last two types of innateness.
It seems that there are recurring semantic features, which also are easy to
relate to each other. This suggests that a model of innate predispositions for
learning certain connections between expression and content is the most
plausible one. If there were no such predispositions, the semantic
categories involved in sound symbolism (if there were sound symbolism at
all) would most probably be haphazard. As we will see in chapter 4 the
semantic categories in sound symbolism are not unlimited but restricted to
a number of types. In the analysis of sound symbolic words (the method of
excerption of words is described in chapter 3) the following categories,
which are differentiated by their meaning, were found:
Sound
Movement
Light
Surface structure
Consistency (plasticity)
Wetness
Dryness
Attitude
Slang
Jocular
Pejorative
Mental feeling
Bodily feeling
Separation
Putting together (convergence)
Diminutive
Augmentative
Form
Iterative
60
It is obvious that some of the categories seem to be of similar types, and
they can be structured in the following way (figure 2.5):
61
pejorative
slang
jocular
mental
feeling
bodily
feeling
separation
size
diminutive
putting together
structure
spatiality
Figure 2.5 Relations between the recurring semantic categories in Swedish sound symbolism.
wetness
dryness
attitude
sound
movement
light
surface
structure
consistency
(plasticity)
attitude
sense
impr.
cognition
iterative
(convergence)
augmentative
form
repetition
Most of the categories can also be described as related to sense impressions
in a more or less direct way. The categories are either related to one sense
or to several senses. The simpler cases are 'sound', related to hearing, 'light'
and 'movement' related to seeing and 'consistency' related to touch. The
experience of 'surface structure', 'wetness' or 'dryness' is a combination of
tactile, auditive and visual experience. 'Form' involves the senses seeing
and touching. 'Separation' and 'putting together' have a more abstract
relation to the expression. 'Diminutive' and 'augmentative' are also more
abstract (but can be explained with reference to the frequency code, cf.
discussion in 1.10.5.) as well as 'iterative' (but it is clearly iconic). Finally
there are the expressive categories of mental and bodily emotion and
attitude which are cognitive categories.
The categories are not mutually exclusive. E.g. 'cognition' and 'spatiality'
could be combined e.g. in prepositions like in and other basic relations.
'Mental feeling' and 'bodily feeling' can combine. However, for the analysis
of significant properties of phonesthemes the above categorisation is
useful.
The categories are identical to or comparable with the semantic categories
listed in the end of 1.10.4, which were based on the studies of different
linguists. The only really new classes are 'separation' (e.g. spl- splinta,
split, splits, splitter, spr- spreta, sprida) and 'putting together' (e.g. knknipa, knyta, knyckla, tv- tving, tvinna).
2.6.1 Relations between the categories
The onomatopoeic free morphemes or phonesthemes are in a special class
since the iconicity concerns language sounds imitating sounds. Almost all
the initial consonant clusters correspond to an onomatopoeic phonestheme.
This means that this category is co-occurring with many of the other
categories, e.g. many consonant clusters can be both 'onomatopoeic' and
'pejorative', however not necessarily in the same root morpheme (see
further discussion in chapter 4).
63
One semantic category, 'light', can be classified as a metaphorical extension
from sound phenomena. The basis for extension is sense analogy - an
iconic phenomenon based on some sort of similarity, e.g. the word warm
can be used not only for temperature but also for colour ('light') and tones
('sound') i. e. using phonesthemes of one sensory modality for words of
another sensory modality. (cf Abelin 1988). (This is not the same as
synesthesia - a neurological, indexical phenomenon, e.g. the experience of
hearing a certain tone because of tasting something that is salty, cf. 1.11.2).
Appealing to sense analogy we can explain the category of 'light'. Sense
analogy concerns conventional relations between words. These relations
are there because we see some sort of similarity between a particular type
of sound and a particular type of light. Underlying sense analogy (as well
as synaesthesia and sound symbolism) could be "stable intermodal
connections". An example of sense analogy with sound as a point of
departure is gn-, as in gnälla (squeak), which can be seen as extended to
gn- in gnistra (glimmer) in a fashion similar to the meaning extension of
e.g. the words skrikig (loud), gäll (shrill), dov (dull) which originally
described sounds but later also colours.
Many of the remaining categories can be explained satisfactorily with the
metaphoric and metonymical model of Lakoff and Johnson (1980) and
Lakoff (1987). Sound symbolism can be seen as depending on
1) innate capacities for metaphor (similarity, icon), especially
personification, e.g. gr- 'negative mood' and for metonymy (contiguity,
index) i. e. closeness in time and space, e.g. gl- denotes both 'light' and
'form letting through light').
and on
2) the result of learning from one's senses through use of the innate
capacities, (e. g. how something sounds when moving in a certain way)
where the innate capacity for metaphor is put to use.
This model seems to incorporate the ideas of both Cytowic and Brown, as
described above.
64
Lakoff (1987, p. 8) writes "human categorization is essentially a matter of
both human experience and imagination - of perception, motor activity and
culture on the one hand, and of metaphor, metonymy and mental imagery
on the other." This would also explain why sound symbolism is partly
universal, partly language specific. Universality from the semantic
perspective depends among other things on human capacity for metaphor
and metonymy; experience is shaped by metaphor and metonymy.
Lakoff and Johnsson (1980) write: "the most obvious ontological
metaphors are those where the physical object is further specified as being
a person." How does this apply to sound symbolism? Sounds of language
naturally cannot be seen as persons, but they can be seen (heard) as
belonging to persons of a certain type, mood etc. Doing this is a kind of
personification, which is a basic conceptual strategy. The material this
personification is working on is based on our experience of how people
sound when of a certain type, in a certain mood etc. This personification
could explain the 'negative mood' applying to persons.
The categories Movement, Form, Consistency, Surface structure, Wetness,
Dryness and Diminutive are simply explained through metonymy
(closeness in time and space) between sound and manipulation of objects
during the language learning process. Already Brown (1958) said that what
was mysteriously called physiognomic (by Werner, 1953) is a result and
consequence of a simple act of learning. In everyday experience there is a
correlation between certain physical attributes of objects and the noises
produced by these objects. A large object is more likely to produce a deep
sound than a small object when it is pushed or when it falls. The
relationship between size and deep sounds can therefore be learned; equally
a connection between sharpness and high frequency and between roundness
or bluntness and a low frequency, cf. however Ohala (1994).
Werner (1953) introduced the concept of physiognomy. According to him,
in the primitive perception of animals, children etc. things are not treated
objectively, but physiognomically, i. e. as if they expressed an inner life
and had a mind; a landscape is cheerful, a cup on its side tired etc. Werner,
in contrast to Lakoff and Johnsson (1980) treated this as an exception.
65
Werner and Kaplan (1963) developed a genetic theory for symbol
formation according to which objects are expressive, e. g. two headlights
look like eyes, music can be threatening. This transcendence of expressive
qualities does not only form the basis for analogies, metaphors and similes,
it is also the basis for seeing similarities in such unrelated things as rounded
shapes in a drawing and the word "maluma".
Lakoff and Johnsson's theory is in agreement with both Brown, Werner and
Kaplan, and Cytowic (i. e. sound symbolism is formed by experience of the
world (learning) (cf. Brown, 1958) but it is also formed by predispositions
of perception (Werner and Kaplan, 1963, Cytowic, 1989). This points to
the conclusion that sound symbolism works in much the same way as other
concepts except that much more is dependent on iconicity and indexicality.
2.6.2 An explanatory model for sound symbolism
From the considerations discussed above a number of dimensions for a
model of sound symbolism can be extracted. The general background to the
model is the framework presented in 1.9, e.g. sound symbolism is central to
language, it can be innate or conventional, it is productive and context
sensitive. The present model tries to explain the nature of the relation
between meaning and expression, "the arrow with a question-mark". Some
dimensions from the model in 1.9 then appear again, e.g. innateness vs.
learning (the latter connected with conventionality). The dimensions are the
following:
1. innateness
2. learning
3. icon (metaphor)
4. index (metonymy)
5. conventionalization
6. the sound symbolic categories:
Sound
Movement
Light
Surface structure
66
Consistency (plasticity)
Wetness
Dryness
Attitude
Slang
Jocular
Pejorative
Mental feeling
Bodily feeling
Separation
Putting together (convergence)
Diminutive
Augmentative
Form
Iterative
The sound symbolic categories concern Swedish since they build on the
analysis of the Swedish lexical material. In a description of another
language they might be slightly different but they would be explainable in
terms of icon and index and mostly relatable to sense impressions or
emotions.
innateness
(icon,index)
conventionalization
sound
symbolism
phonesthemes
for
onomatopoeia
pejoratives,
surface
structure,
movement,
form, etc.
learning
Figure 2.6 An explanatory model for sound symbolism, which shows the
cause of the motivated relation between expression and meaning.
67
The model in figure 2.6 tries to capture the relations between the different
concepts that are fundamental to sound symbolism. It says that the relation
between expression and content in sound symbolism can be caused by
either innateness or learning. What is predisposed can be affected by
learning, and what is learned is depending on innate categories for thinking,
such as index (metonymy) or icon (metaphor). Sound symbolism is the
result of both innate capacities and learning. Some types of sound
symbolism depend more on an indexical relation (connected with learning)
e.g. phonesthemes for 'movement', 'form' etc. while other types of sound
symbolism depend more on an iconic relation, e.g. phonesthemes for
'onomatopoeia' and perhaps 'pejoratives', but these have nevertheless been
put in the same box. The model also shows that sound symbolic expression,
and maybe also conent, is always conventionalized, to a greater or lesser
degree. This explains the fact that e.g. words for a certain animal call can
differ between languages at the same times as it is motivated. The model
can be seen as a static model where the processes to the left are necessary
prerequisites for the existence of phonesthemes. It could also be seen as a
basis for how sound symbolic expressions have emerged in individuals in
interaction within a language system, with the result of sound symbolic
expressions in that particular language.
The concepts iconicity and indexicality can be used for describing the
nature of the different explanations of the relation between expression and
form in sound symbolism described above. The concepts iconicity and
indexicality (superordinate to metaphor and metonymy) can also be used
for describing the semantic relations between the semantic features
reoccurring in sound symbolism (cf. 2.6) The relations between some of the
semantic categories will be further specified in 4.6. Figure 2.6 An
explanatory model for sound symbolism, which shows the cause of the
motivated relation between expression and meaning.
The model in figure 2.6 tries to capture the relations between the different
concepts that are fundamental to sound symbolism. It says that the relation
between expression and content in sound symbolism can be caused by
either innateness or learning. What is predisposed can be affected by
68
learning, and what is learned is depending on innate categories for thinking,
such as index (metonymy) or icon (metaphor). Sound symbolism is the
result of both innate capacities and learning. Some types of sound
symbolism depend more on an indexical relation (connected with learning)
e.g. phonesthemes for 'movement', 'form' etc. while other types of sound
symbolism depend more on an iconic relation, e.g. phonesthemes for
'onomatopoeia' and perhaps 'pejoratives', but these have nevertheless been
put in the same box. The model also shows that sound symbolic expression,
and maybe also conent, is always conventionalized, to a greater or lesser
degree. This explains the fact that e.g. words for a certain animal call can
differ between languages at the same times as it is motivated. The model
can be seen as a static model where the processes to the left are necessary
prerequisites for the existence of phonesthemes. It could also be seen as a
basis for how sound symbolic expressions have emerged in individuals in
interaction within a language system, with the result of sound symbolic
expressions in that particular language.
The concepts iconicity and indexicality can be used for describing the
nature of the different explanations of the relation between expression and
form in sound symbolism described above. The concepts iconicity and
indexicality (superordinate to metaphor and metonymy) can also be used
for describing the semantic relations between the semantic features
reoccurring in sound symbolism (cf. 2.6) The relations between some of the
semantic categories will be further specified in 4.6.
69
3 Method
The method used in this investigation is a combination of intuition and
empirical studies (experiments). Using intuition about language is an
indispensable part of all linguistic research, as the researcher cannot avoid
having some knowledge of the subject. However, intuition is not
sufficient, and will therefore be supported by empirical studies.
This investigation of sound symbolic words in language is concentrated on
initial and final consonant clusters in Swedish. It consists of three main
stages.
1. A number of Swedish dictionaries were excerpted with the purpose of
establishing tentative phonesthemes for Swedish. The material collected
was stored in spreadsheats, which could be manually searched for roots,
key words and semantic features.
2. Stage 2, which is a smaller part of the study, consists of partial
excerptions from other languages. The excerptions were done using
meanings, or, in some cases, phonesthemes as the point of departure.
3. A number of tests were performed in order to study the tentative
Swedish phonesthemes found in stage 1.
Below follows an elaboration of the three stages. In each chapter there is a
more detailed description of the method.
3.1 Stage 1: Collection of lexical material
Initial consonant clusters
Since the study has its point of departure in the Swedish language it was
initiated by an excerption of sound symbolic words in Swedish. The
lexical material consists of excerptions from Svenska Akademiens Ordlista
(SAOL 10, The Wordlist of the Swedish Academy), a word list with some
semantic information, and Svensk ordbok (SOB, Dictionary of Swedish),
a dictionary with definitions, exemplifications etc.
71
The excerption of words from SOB was done in the following way. To
qualify as a candidate for being a possibly interesting word, one or two of
the following criteria should be met:
(i) The word is clearly onomatopoeic.
(ii) At least two1 word roots with the same consonant sequence and
similar meaning can be found in the lexical material, where the likeness
does not come from trivial morphological relatedness like derivation of
e.g. nouns or adjectives. As an example, fjant, fjanta, fjantig are counted
as forms of the same root. Kladd, kladda och kladdig are another
example. In other words: compounds, derivations or words belonging to
different parts of speech are seen as different instances of one root
morpheme (containing a phonestheme).
Through the method described above there is no absolute guarantee that
all possible phonesthemes for Swedish are found. Those that are found are
chosen with approximately the same criteria. The emphasis has been on an
analysis of all words, rather than a detailed analysis of a few words. The
purpose of this is to get an overview of the main traits in the Swedish
lexical material.
The Swedish lexicon (represented by SOB) was manually excerpted for
root morphemes with onomatopoeic or other sound symbolic meanings,
(motivated words.) Only words beginning with consonant clusters were
considered in this excerption.
"Key words" from the SOB were also registered in the excerption. A key
word is a formal representative of the sense connected to a root
morpheme and usually denotes e.g. 'sound', 'shape', 'texture' (sense
related categories), 'pejorative' etc.
A key word is either a word in the definition of the actual word, or a
word in the definition of a word which is in the definition of the actual
word, or another word in the paraphrase of a more peripheral mening of
the actual word, or a synonym. Ideally the key word should have been in
the definition of the actual word, but unfortunately SOB is not completely
1
For lexically infrequent clusters, with less than 13 roots, 1 root sufficed if it had one of
the recurring semantic features.
72
consistent in its way of giving definitions. Sometimes a word is only given
a very short definition, e.g. a synonym.
The key word is always a word which is written into the definition of
the lexicon entry of the word under consideration and, in a most cases, a
word in the definition of the actual word.
This function of key words is to ensure a certain amount of objectivity,
through consensus, in the selection procedure. It depends then on earlier
semantic analyses by several persons. Key words are sound symbolic
categories or hyponyms to these. They can be found in Appendix 1.
Examples of key words from SOB are: ljud (sound), rörelse (movement),
spetsig (pointed), ljus (light), äcklig (nasty), vatten (water), tjock (thick),
klibbig, (sticky), ohyfsad (rude), löjlig (ridiculous). Naturally there were
expectations as to what semantic categories would be interesting; the key
words are related to the senses, to 'form', 'mental feeling' etc. Words
with definitions containing appropriate key words were, however, not
considered if a connection between expression and meaning was not felt,
using linguistic intuition, as e.g. for skam. No part of the expression side
of this word seems to mirror the words oförmåga or förkastlig of the
definition. The opposite is also the case; a connection seemed to be present
but an appropriate key word was not to be found in the definition. 2
Some words which can be found in SAOL 10 are described as colloquial,
while they in fact are out of date. Nevertheless they are not difficult to get
a vague understanding of. Examples are words like pjask, pjasker and
pjalt3 that have a clearly pejorative ring. These and the words of the
previous paragraph could probably easily be (mis)interpreted in an
appropriate context!
With an attitude of accepting doubtful words rather than discarding them,
about 1,000 words – in the sense of root morphemes – were registered
for further analysis. According to Nusvensk frekvensordbok 4 (Allén et
2
There are also words that, from the point of view of sound, would seem to be
appropriate for mirroring a certain content but do not. Examples are fläns (part of a
machine), skralna (to begin to head, of wind; sailing term), and slubb (sort of spinning
machine).
3
In SAOL 12 these words are no longer included.
73
al, 1980) the number of lexical morphemes in Swedish amount to around
8,300 (suffixes add another 562 morphemes).
It is important to keep in mind, both what concerns the data collection and
the data analysis, that the borders between the different meanings are
fuzzy and partly subjective, and the resulting diagrams and tables are to
be seen as points of departure for different investigations, experiments
and discussions. The primary aim of the data collection is to get an
overview of the structure of the clusters and to show patterns of forms
and contents.
Final clusters
Final consonant combinations with recurring meanings were also
excerpted from Svensk baklängesordbok (1981) (Reverse Order
Dictionary of Swedish) and Nusvensk frekvensordbok (Allén et al, 1980)
(Frequency Dictionary of Present-Day Swedish). They were analyzed in a
fashion similar to the one described above.
3.2 Stage 2: Cross-language comparisons
With a focus on both the expression and the content side of phonesthemes,
some comparisons with other languages were done. The emphasis was on
certain easily defined meanings. Also, some contrastive experiments of
interpretation, testing Swedish phonesthemes on native speakers of other
languages, were made.
3.2.1 Cross-language thesaurus studies
The lexical study consists of two studies, one in Swedish and one in
English. It is concentrated on the semantic fields of 'stupidity' and
'surface structure' – 'rough' and 'smooth'. These fields were chosen
because they were different in type, they were quite common ('stupidity'
is a subclass of 'pejorative') and also quite uncomplicated semantically.
There were three informants from each language.
3.2.2 Cross-language informant studies
Self-imitative interjections
The Swedish primary interjections (see Ideforss, 1928) have been
translated to 8 different languages with the help of informants. The
languages are Icelandic, English, Polish, Hungarian, Finnish, Ososo,
74
Malagasi and Slovenian. The material is presented in Appendix 2 and it is
grouped according to type of interjection. In some cases it was difficult to
translate word for word. The semantic contents of an interjection instead
had to be described (with semantic features) after which the informant
gave the closest correspondence in her own language.
Interjections imitating animal sounds
Swedish interjections imitating animal calls were translated, with the help
of informants, into 17 different languages: Icelandic, English, Polish,
Hungarian, Finnish, Ososo, Malagasi, Slovenian, Korean, Japanese,
Chinese, Estonian, Urdu, Persian, Kurdish, Arabic, and Spanish.
Interpretation of animal sounds
Sixteen of the interjections imitating animal calls from different languages
were chosen to test how speakers of other languages would interpret
them. The ones chosen were those whose expression sides were most
different between the languages studied, in order to make the task as
difficult as possible. The subjects in this test were 15 persons, with the
following first languages: Swedish (8 subjects) French (2 subjects),
English, Hungarian, Czech, Slovenian, Ososo. All were tested on the same
occasion. They listened to pronunciations of the words for the animal calls
and they saw them transcribed in IPA. They were told to guess which
animal had gotten its call conventionalized in each way, and to write down
their answers.
Cross-language experiment
Furthermore, one person representing each of the languages: Arabic,
Spanish, German, Dutch, Ibo and English, took part in an experimental
study of persons who did not have Swedish as a first language. The study
was conducted in much the same way as one of the experiments described
below and in 7.1, (test 2.a) – a free choice test from expression to
meaning. The main difference was that the subjects were confronted
mostly with real words. There were, however, also a few neologisms
based on phonesthemes.
75
3.3 Stage 3: Experiments
3.3.1 Experiments with neologisms
To further penetrate the status and productivity of the tentative Swedish
phonesthemes of language users of today, a number of tests were
performed (see Appendix 3).
The tests investigated both production and understanding of written
neologisms, which were, in three of the tests, modelled on the tentative
phonesthemes. The tests consisted of free and forced choice tasks. There
was was an additional matching test where two neologisms were to be
matched with two meanings. The subjects were 14–15 native Swedish
speakers. In one test they were instructed to freely interpret neologisms
and in another they were supposed to produce neologisms out of different
concepts written on the test sheet. In the next set of tests the subjects
should, in interpreting neologisms, chose from three alternative meanings
written on the test sheet, or, in producing neologisms, choose among three
alternative neologisms, also written on the test sheet. The design of the
experiments is described in detail in 7.1.
3.4 Further method
Explanatory models for sound symbolism are also constructed, see 1.9,
2.6.2. These models aim at explaining the nature of the motivated
connection between expression and meaning in sound symbolism.
Comparisons between the results of the lexical studies, the experiments –
also the cross-language experiments – some of the cross language
comparisons4 ,and the models are made in chapter 8.
4
Interjections and animal sounds of the cross language comparisons belong to the classes
expressive interjections and onomatopoeia which are not included in the models of 1.9
and 2.6.2.
76
4 Analysis of the initial consonant clusters
4.1. Data analysis, a short overview
All the entries of the lexicon Svensk Ordbok (1986) were examined
(around 65, 000 lexemes, which corresponds to approximately 8, 3001
morphemes, which is the number of morphemes in Swedish according to
Allén et al, 1980). Around 1,250 words (root morphemes, cf. 3.1) were
judged to be possibly motivated.
Of all the 37 initial consonant clusters of Swedish all but one are used for
sound symbolism. The 37 clusters are: bj-, bl-, br-, dr-, dv-, fj-, f l - ,
fn-, fr-, gl-, gn-, gr-, kl-, kn-, kr-, kv-, mj-, nj-, pj-, pl-, pr-,
sk-, skr-, skv-, sl-, sm-, sn-, sp-, spj-, spl-, spr-, st-, str-, s v - ,
tr-, tv-, vr-. The unused one (dv- ) has a lexical frequency of 3
morphemes. Thus, almost all clusters seem to be used, but they are used
to varying extents and for different purposes.
(Now and then one hears authentic examples of e.g. onomatopoeic
expressions which use non-standard clusters (cf. Garlén (1988) like
sklofsa ("walk in mud"). It is also the case that a cluster like spl-, which
normally is not onomatopoeic in Swedish, is often used for imitating
sounds, for example in comic strips – perhaps influenced by English. In
comic strips expressions like splofs and splafs are common.)
All initial consonant clusters were analyzed closely, both those that appear
to have a greater and those that seem to have a smaller amount of
motivated root morphemes (cf. 3.1).
For each cluster, each motivated root morpheme was classified according
to its motivated semantic features. (cf. 2.6). A root morpheme can have
one or more motivated semantic features, e.g. skvalpa (lap, ripple, splash,
spill) has 'sound', 'wetness'. Even though part of the meaning might also
be due to -alpa and not only to skv-, such possibilities were not
1 This number of morphemes is the result of an investigation of a one million word
newspaper corpus (NFO 4). It is most probable that newspaper language contains fewer
roots than spoken language, but these figures are not known at present. The estimation of
65, 000 lexemes is excluding transparent compounds.
77
considered at this stage.2 The semantic features 'wetness' and 'sound' of
skvalpa were, in this analysis, attributed to the cluster skv- because there
are two or more root morphemes beginning with skv- that have the same
semantic features. The SOB-definition of skvalpa is: "vara i rörelse och
därvid ge ifrån sig ett kluckande och plaskande ljud – om vatten o.d."(my
italics) ("to be moving and thereby emit a gurgling and splashing sound –
of water, etc")
The SOB-definitions of other skv- lexemes are:
skvimpa (splash to and fro) "skvalpa med små rörelser – ofta så att vätska
spills ut" (The semantic features are the same as for skvalpa (lap with
small movements – often so that liquid is spilled out), with the addition of
'diminutive' – which is probably due to the i, cf. Ultan, 1978.)
skvätta (splash, squirt) "fara i väg i skvättar" (go off in squirts), skvätt:
"liten mängd vätska" (small amount of liquid) The semantic features are
'movement', 'diminutive', 'wetness'.
skvala (pour, gush, rush) "rinna rikligt och ljudligt (flow abundantly and
noisily). Rinna (flow) is defined as "förflytta sig nedåt (längs viss yta) i
sammanhängande formlös mängd – om vätska e.d." (move downwards
(along a certain surface) in a continuous shapeless quantity – about liquid,
etc) and riklig (abundant) is defined as "förekommande i stor mängd eller
omfattning" (occurring in large quantity or range) and so the semantic
features of skvala are 'movement', 'wetness', 'sound' and 'augmentative'.
As we see the features 'movement', 'wetness' and 'sound' are all present
in three of these four words. There are around eight more words
(considering the root morphemes) beginning with skv-.
(The cluster -Vlpa ends the following words (considering the root
morphemes): valpa (whelp), skvalpa (lap), stolpa (walk with long paces),
pulpa (pulp), hjälpa (help), stjälpa (tip over), skölpa (hollow out with a
special tool) – no other root morphemes with the features 'wetness' or
'sound', but 4 root morphemes with the feature 'movement'.)
2 For an analysis of combined effects of initial cluster, final clusters and, to some extent,
of vowels, see 5.6.
78
Diagram 4.1 shows the number of motivated root morphemes for every
cluster. The number of all root morphemes and of the motivated root
morphemes for each cluster can be studied in diagrams 4.2 and 4.3. Also
the ratios between the number of sound symbolic root morphemes on the
one hand (irrespective of exact meaning) and total number of root
morphemes beginning with a certain cluster was calculated, see diagram
4.4.
In addition to this, the various semantic features (cf. 4.2.3) for every
cluster and the ratios for the occurrence of different semantic features per
total number of root morphemes (for every cluster) were put into the
chart. These figures are used for the following diagrams.3
Diagram 4.5 shows the absolute numbers of all initial consonant clusters
for all semantic features.
In diagrams 4.6 to 4.15 the distributions of separate semantic features
over different clusters can be seen.
Diagrams 4.16 to 4.23 show the sound symbolic profiles of different
clusters, i.e. how the semantic features are differently distributed.
In addition to this, the relations between the different types of meaning
within a cluster were analyzed synchronically.
4.2 Results
In this section some of the results from the lexical analysis are presented.
The same material will be studied from different angles and in greater or
lesser detail. The focus will be either on the different consonant clusters,
or on the different meanings. There will be general patterns and patterns
for certain clusters or meanings.
3 If all dialectal, archaic and slang words had been counted the ratios of motivated root
morphemes would have been higher for most consonant clusters. (This reflects the
phenomenon of slang words floating in and out of language at another rate, cf. 1.3 - 1.4).
As an example the following root morphemes, found in Svenska Akademiens ordlista
över svenska språket (SAOL 10), are not included: skvattra "snattra"(quack, gabble,
chatter), skrålla (coll.) "löjlig damhatt" (silly lady's hat), skryp (dial.) "slösaktig"
(wasteful). The main reason for not counting these is that they are not covered in SOB;
special studies would have to be made of dialectal and slang dictionaries. There seem to
be more dialectal and archaic words in SAOL than in SOB.
79
4.2.1 More and less sound symbolic clusters
The 36 initial consonant clusters are very different with respect to how
many root morphemes they contain. They also differ considerably in how
many sound symbolic root morphemes there are for each cluster.
Diagram 4.1 shows the number of motivated root morphemes for all 36
clusters.
Diagram 4.1 shows e.g. that sl- has the highest number of sound symbolic
clusters, namely 83, while nj- has the fewest, namely only 1. In absolute
numbers, the 6 clusters that have most motivated root morphemes are (in
order of descending frequency): sl-, sn-, kn-, kr-, kl-, sp-. Of these 6
clusters 3 begin with an s and 3 begin with a k. There is reason to wonder
if nj- should be counted as a sound symbolic cluster at all, but nj-, as well
as all other clusters, must be seen in the light of how many root
morphemes there are in the total vocabulary for each cluster. This
comparison is done in diagram 4.2.
80
sl
sn
kn
kr
kl
sp
st
gl
tr
fl
skr
pl
bl
sm
str
gr
sk
sv
spr
pr
gn
kv
dr
vr
br
fr
fn
skv
mj
fj
pj
spl
bj
spj
tv
nj
0
20
40
60
80
100
Diagram. 4.1. More and less sound symbolic initial consonant clusters. Number of
motivated root morphemes per cluster.
81
st
pr
tr
kr
sl
sp
br
sn
gr
sk
kl
pl
fl
fr
str
kn
dr
gl
sv
bl
skr
kv
sm
spr
fj
gn
tv
vr
bj
mj
skv
fn
spl
pj
no of motiv roots
all roots
spj
nj
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Diagram. 4.2 More and less sound symbolic consonant clusters.
Number of root morphemes and number of motivated root
morphemes per cluster.
82
Diagram 4.2 shows the proportions between total number of root
morphemes and the number of motivated root morphemes. The diagram
shows for example that the cluster pj- contains both few root morphemes
and few motivated root morphemes. So there is a high proportion of
motivated ones. It also shows that tr- has many root morphemes, quite a
few motivated root morphemes, but a lower proportion of motivated root
morphemes. For percentages of the proportion motivated root
morphemes/all root morphemes, see diagram 4.4 (It should be noted that
one motivated root morpheme may contain one or more motivated
semantic feature.)
Diagram. 4.3 shows the same information as diagram 4.2. but here the
clusters are ranked from the most sound symbolic to the least sound
symbolic, as in 4.1. The diagram shows that lexically frequent clusters do
not necessarily contain a large proportion of sound symbolic morphemes,
e.g. pr-. (A large proportion of the non-motivated morphemes beginning
with pr- are due to loan words4 and it is also quite difficult to count the
morphemes.)
Table 4.1 (related to diagrams 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3) shows the number of root
morphemes and the number of motivated root morphemes for the 36
clusters. The table is ordered alphabetically. The clusters are ranked from
the most sound symbolic (in absolute numbers) to the least sound
symbolic.
4 It would be interesting, in further research, to study the influence of loan words on the
frequencies of sound symbolic root morphemes per cluster. Words older than a 100
years, etc. could easily be found with the aid of the machine readable version of SAOB
(Ordbok över svenska språket, utgiven av Svenska Akademien). It could be hypothesized
that there would be a higher frequency of sound symbolic root morphemes among the
older root morphemes. On the other hand, root morphemes that confirm with the native
pattern could be preferred in loans, cf. discussion in 1.5.)
83
sl
sn
kn
kr
kl
sp
gl
st
tr
fl
skr
pl
bl
sm
str
gr
sk
spr
sv
pr
gn
kv
dr
vr
br
fn
fr
skv
mj
fj
pj
spl
no of motiv roots
all roots
bj
spj
tv
nj
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Diagram 4.3. Number of root morphemes and number of motivated root
morphemes per cluster, which are ordered from highest number of sound
symbolic root morphemes to lowest number of sound symbolic root
morphemes.
84
Table 4.1 Number of root morphemes
total number of
root morphemes
bj13
bl64
br130
dr74
fj24
fl96
fn10
fr87
gl69
gn22
gr126
kl115
kn77
kr169
kv56
mj11
nj3
pj7
pl100
pr200
sk116
skr63
skv10
sl150
sm55
sn126
sp137
spj6
spl9
spr34
st279
str77
sv65
tr169
tv20
vr19
85
and motivated root morphemes.
motivated root
Rank
morphemes
5
32
33
13
11
25
16
23
7
29
36
10
10
26
10
26
45
7
20
21
26
16
51
5
59
3
53
4
17
22
7
29
1
36
6
31
34
12
21
20
25
17
35
11
9
28
83
1
31
14
62
2
47
6
4
34
5
32
23
18
45
7
30
15
23
18
44
9
3
35
12
23
Table 4.1 shows, for example, that 5 out of 13 root morphemes beginning
with bj- have a sound symbolic meaning. The remaining 8 (13-5)
unmotivated root morphemes beginning with bj- are:
bjuda (invite, offer, etc)
bjugg (barley)
bjussa (slang for bjuda)
bjälke (balk)
björk (birch)
björkna (a fish)
björn (bear)
björna (demand repayment)
and the 5 motivated root morphemes are:
Key word
bjäbba
bjäfs
bjällra
bjärt
bjässe
uppnosigt prat (cheeky talk)
överdriven (exaggerated)
klingande (chiming bell)
lysande (shining)
mycket stor (very big)
(Only key words, not the complete definitions, are given above.)
4.2.2 Proportions of motivated root morphemes.
Summary
To sum up part of the foregoing comparisons, diagram 4.4 shows the
proportions between number of sound symbolic morphemes and total
number of morphemes in percentages.
86
fn
gn
skv
pj
kn
spr
spj
gl
mj
vr
spl
sm
skr
sl
bl
sn
kl
str
fl
bj
sv
sp
pl
nj
kr
kv
fj
tr
sk
dr
gr
st
tv
%
pr
fr
br
0
20
40
60
80
100
Diagram 4.4. Percentage of motivated root morphemes per cluster.
87
Diagram 4.4. shows the proportion of motivated root morphemes in
percentage of the total number of root morphemes per individual cluster.
The root morphemes are the same as in diagrams 4.1–4.3. We can see that
the clusters fn-, gn-, skv-, pj-, kn-, spr-, spj-, gl- mj- and vr- have a
greater ratio of motivated root morphemes, well over 60%. The cluster
fn- is the most sound symbolic, at 100 %. These clusters are all lexically
infrequent clusters with the exception for kn- and gl- which are
comparatively larger, (cf. diagrams 4.2 and 4.3). It is clear that lexically
infrequent clusters are exploited sound symbolically to a higher degree
than lexically frequent clusters are (cf. the discussion in 8.3). The clusters
br-, pr-, and fr- have the lowest proportion of sound symbolic root
morphemes. Of these clusters pr- is very frequent lexically and br- is
quite frequent too (cf. diagrams 4.2, 4.3). This phenomenon is however
not symmetrical; there are lexically very frequent clusters like sl- which
are also sound symbolic to quite a high degree (55%). An interesting
result is that the two most sound symbolic clusters, fn- and gn-, end with
n while the three least sound symbolic clusters, pr-, fr- and br-, all end
with an r.
4.2.3 Types of meaning
After calculating the ratios of motivated root morphemes per cluster, an
analysis was made of the semantic features appearing in each cluster. The
analysis can be done in detail or more abstractly. The analysis presented
in this chapter is quite detailed, with more specific semantic features. For
example there are the categories 'narrow form', round form', 'thin
form', hollow form', 'short wide form', 'crooked form', 'long thin
form', 'winding form' and 'small end form'. On a more abstract level
these can of course be classified as 'form'. The same goes for e.g. 'surface
structure' which is further analyzed into 'rough surface structure',
'smooth surface structure', 'hardness'. Some categories are broader than
their names imply. This should be noted for 'pejorative', which includes
something more generally negative and 'talking' which includes all sounds
made by humans.
The categories of diagram. 4.5 are related to those presented in chapter 2
in the manner listed below. They are not mutually exclusive, since it was
judged to be interesting to count certain frequent special cases of
meaning. Therefore e.g. 'mental feeling' is subdivided into 'bad mood'
and 'other mental feeling'. However, in the following discussions and
88
diagrams 'other mental feeling', etc is simply called 'mental feeling'5 . The
feature 'slang' is a stylistic feature and in fact adds another dimension.
Sound:
Movement:
Light:
Surface structure:
Consistency:
(Plasticity)
Wetness:
Dryness:
Attitude:
Slang:
Jocular:
Pejorative:
Mental feeling:
Bodily feeling:
Separation:
Sound
Talking
Beat
Movement
Quick or strong movement
Walking
Falling
Potential movement
Quickness
Light
Gaze
Rough surface structure
Smooth surface structure
Soft consistency
Hardness
Slackness
Stiffness
Wetness
Adhesion
Dryness
Attitude
Secrecy
Slang
Jocular
Pejorative
Destruction
Mental feeling
Bad mood
Bodily feeling
Suffocation
Separation
5 Other such cases are 'other movement' which is called 'movement', 'light emission'
which is called 'light', 'other wetness' which is called 'wetness', 'other attitude' which is
called 'attitude', 'other mental feeling' which is called 'mental feeling', 'other bodily
feeling' which is called 'bodily feeling', 'other form' which is called 'form', and 'other
iterative' which is called 'iterative'.
89
Putting together
Diminutive:
Augmentative:
Form:
Putting together
Diminutive
Augmentative
Form
Round form
Short-wide form
Thin form
Hollow form
Winding form
Long thin form
Narrow form
Small end form
Bent form
Iterative
Fine grain
Iterative:
The most frequent meanings (shown in table 4.2) are, in descending
order:
Table 4.2 The most frequent semantic features, in descending order.
semantic
feature
'pejorative'
'sound'
'long thin form'
'quick or strong
movement'
'wetness'
freq
163
107
97
67
semantic
feature
'gaze'
'thin form'
'smooth surface'
'slang'
15
14
13
12
63
'beat'
12
'talking'
'light'
55
32
'diminutive'
'round form'
31
23
'slackness'
'rough surface
structure'
'separation'
'putting
together'
'hardness'
'way of walking' 22
90
freq
11
10
semantic
feature
'attitude'
'jocular'
'falling'
'soft
consistency'
'small end
form'
'secrecy'
'iterative'
freq
4
3
9
9
'bent form'
'narrow form'
3
3
8
'stiffness'
2
5
5
5
4
4
'destruction'
21
'bodily feeling'
8
'winding form'
20
'fine grain'
8
'short-wide
form'
'bad mood'
'form'
18
'hollow form'
8
18
16
'quickness'
'adhesion'
6
6
91
'potential
movement'
'light tactile
sensation'
'augmentative'
2
1
'dryness'
1
2
pejorative
sound
long thin form
quick or strong movem
wetness
talking
light
diminutive
round form
way of walking
destruction
winding form
bad mood
shortwide form
form
gaze
thin form
smooth surface
beat
slang
slackness
rough surf. str
separation
putting together
hardness
bodily feeling
fine grain
hollow form
quickness
adhesion
attitude
jocular
falling
soft cons
small end form
secrecy
bent form
narrow form
stiffness
pot. movem.
light tactile sens.
augmentative
dryness
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Diagram, 4.5 The diagram shows the extent to which different semantic
features are exploited by all initial consonant clusters, in absolute
numbers. It shows e.g. that 'pejorative' is the most frequent semantic
feature.
92
Combinations of features
The high frequency of some of the features is probably due to their
ability to combine with other features. 'Pejorative' and 'sound' often
combine with other features in a root morpheme, e.g. 'walking', 'talking'
('way of walking' and 'talking' are very often combined with
'pejorative'). A feature like 'winding form', on the other hand, is very
low frequent (only found in two clusters, kr- and sn-) and this low
frequency might be partly a consequence of lower ability to combine with
other features. Likewise 'bad mood' is confined to the clusters gr-, vrand tr-. The frequencies of different semantic features for each cluster
and how different features combine can be studied in Appendix 1.
4.3 Frequent semantic features
A detailed account for how semantic features exploit the five most
frequent clusters (cf. diagram. 4.5) is shown below. These features are
'pejorative', 'wetness', 'sound', 'long thin form' and 'quick or strong
movement'.
Diagram 4.6 shows the feature 'pejorative' and how it is distributed in
terms of percentage over 28 clusters. (The percentage is calculated on
number of features per total number of root morphemes, for every
cluster.)
4.3.1 Pejorative
Diagram 4.6 shows the percentage of morphemes with a pejorative
feature. For example, 71 % of all morphemes beginning with pj- and
44% of all morphemes beginning with fn- have a pejorative meaning.
Almost all clusters have morphemes with pejorative features. As can be
seen, pj- is the cluster with the highest percentage of pejorative root
morphemes. fn- comes second and then two more cluster ending in j: nj(which is however to small to be considered interesting) and fj-.
93
sm
kl
kr
gr
pl
fl
gl
mj
skv
sn
dr
bl
kn
skr
bj
vr
sl
gn
fj
nj
fn
pj
Diagram 4.6. Percent root morphemes with the feature 'pejorative' for different clusters.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
sp
sk
pr
str
tr
sv
It is also interesting to study the absolute numbers of morphemes with
pejorative features, since some clusters are lexically very frequent and
others are very infrequent. The morphemes with a pejorative feature for
the clusters are shown in table 4.3 (the absolute number of root
morphemes for each cluster is placed after every cluster). The clusters
are presented in order of descending relative frequency (cf. diagram 4.6).
Table 4.3 The morphemes with the feature pejorative, the initial
consonant clusters involved, and their absolute frequencies.
pj-: pjatt (squirt), pjoller (babble,
twaddle), pjosk (coddling), pjunk (coddling;
puling), pjåkig (mawkish, bad) (SAOL also
lists pjalt (stackare), pjunk ("gnäll, pjosk"),
pjåk ("pjunk"))
fn-: fnask (prostitute), fnatta (run about),
fnoskig (dotty), fnurra (cf. grumpy)
nj-: njugg (niggardly)
fj-: fjant (busybody), fjollig (foolish), fjompig
(foolish), fjuttig (insignificant), fjäsa
(show off), fjäska (fawn on) (SAOL also lists
fjoskig (fnoskig) (dotty)
gn-: gnat (nagging), gneta (stint), gnidare
(miser)
sl-: slabba (splash), slabbertacka
(gossipmonger), sladdra (gossip), slafs
(sloppiness), slampa (slut), slams
(slovenliness), slarvig (slipshod), slas
(slugish and slipshod person), slasa
(walk lazily), slask (slush), slatt (heeltap),
slattrig (gossiping), slidder (gossip), slinka (wench),
slisk (sweet stuff), slok (bloke),
sludder (slurred speech), slum (slum),
slusk (shabby-looking fellow), slyna (bitch),
slyngel (young rascal), slö (indolent),
slödder (riff-raff), slösa (squander)
vr-: vräkig (flashy), vränga
(turn inside out), vrövel (silly talk)
bj-: bjäbba (squabble, bicker), bjäfs
95
5
4
1
6
3
24
3
(gewgaws)
skr-: skral (poor, bad), skrodera (brag),
skrubb (cubby-hole), skrutt (rubbish),
skrymt (hypocrisy), skräppa (brag),
skrävla (brag), skröna (tall story)
kn-: knackig (quite bad), knal
(economically weak), knasig (crazy),
kneg (job), kneken (vara på kneken:
be down one's luck), knodd (bounder),
knorva (make creased
and wrinkled), knutte (person who is
one-sidedly focused on a certain activity),
knöl (bastard), knös (rich fellow)
bl-: bladdra (babble), blaffa (big ugly
colour patch), blaj (silly talk), blarr (silly
talk), blaska (splash), bliga (stare stupidly),
bluddra (talk nonsense), blunder (
blunder) (SAOL also lists (blaha
(nonsense talk))
dr-: drasut (lanky fellow), dratta (fall),
dravel (twaddle), dregel (dribble), drulle
(clumsy fool), drummel (lout), drägg
(dregs), drälla (spill), dröse (unstructured
amount)
sn-: snafs (dirt), snaskig (smutty), snatta
(pinch), snicksnack (chit-chat), sniken
(greedy), snobb (dandy), snorkig (snooty),
snusk (smuttiness), snylta (sponge),
snål (stingy), snärta (young thing),
snöd (sordid), snöplig (inglorious)
skv-: skvallra (gossip)
mj-: mjäkig (namby-pamby)
gl-: glop (whipper-snapper), glufsa
(scoff), glunkas (det glunkas: there is a
rumour), glupande (ravenous), glupsk
(greedy), glåpord (taunt)
fl-: flacka (rove), flamsig (silly, giggly),
96
2
8
10
8
9
13
1
1
6
flina (sneer, cackle), flitter (?), floskel6
(empty phrase), flabba (cackle), flopp
(ignominious failure), flummig (intellectually
unclear). SAOL also lists flepig ("mjäkig",
namby-pamby)
pl-: pladuska (irregular spot), plottra
(potter about), plufsig (bloated), plump
(rude), plump (blot), plundra (plunder),
plussig (bloated)
gr-: grumlig (muddy), grummel
(dregs), grums (dregs), grumsa
(grumble), gräll (glaring), gräma (grieve),
gräslig (terrible)
kr-: krafs (trash), krake (wretch), kram
(trash), krams (trash), kratta (funk), kreta
(badly whittle), krimskrams (knick-knacks),
kruserlig (ceremonious), krångel (fuss), kräk
(wretch)
tr-: tradig (boring), traggla (plod through),
trams (rubbish, drivel), traska (trot,
jog), trassel (tangle, muddle), troll
(troll), truls (unordered collection)
kl-: klanka (grouse, grumble), klantig
(clumsily stupid), klotter (scribble, doodle),
kludda (daub, smudge), klyscha7 (cliché;
lump of spittle), klåpare (bungler, botcher)
sm-: smicker (blarney), smolk
(particle of dirt), smuts (filth)
sv-: svamla (drivel), svassa (strut,
swagger), svulstig (bombastic)
str-: strul (fuss), strunt (rubbish),
(stuck-up blighter)
pr-: pracka (fob), pryl (awl), prångla (utter counterfeit coin)
6 The
8
7
7
10
7
6
3
3
2
3
word floskel comes from Latin flosculus which means "little flower; showy
decoration in speech" but it also fits into the Swedish pattern (cf. discussion in 1.5)
7 Another interesting word, which can be said to come from cliché, but which fits into the
pejorative group (and also with all the root morphemes denoting way of talking, etc.)
especially in connection with the dialectal meaning of klyscha (lump of spittle).
97
sk-: skavank (flaw), skorv (old tub)
sp-: spill (waste), spoling (whipper-snapper)
2
2
The following diagram (4.7) shows the absolute number of features for
the clusters.8 This diagram shows that sl- has 24 root morphemes with a
pejorative feature, sn- has 13, etc. It is clear that a large number of all
pejorative morphemes begin with an s. Sl-, sn- and skr- begin a large
number of morphemes that have a pejorative component (but these
clusters are not the most dominated by sound symbolic root morphemes,
cf. diagram 4.4).
Note again that one root morpheme can have more than one motivated
meaning component. For example 'sound' and 'pejorative' are often
combined as in bluddra, or 'sound', 'wetness' and 'movement' as in
skvimpa. 'Walking' is often combined with an additional slightly
pejorative meaning component (e. g. svassa has 'pretentious manner').
'Talking' is also often combined with an additional pejorative meaning
component (e.g. pladdra implies 'nonsense').
8 The reason why there are 30 clusters here instead of 28 as in diagram 4.6 is that the
frequency of 1 morpheme is below 1% in a large cluster like st-.
98
pr
gn
fn
pj
gl
kl
fj
pl
gr
tr
fl
skr
bl
dr
kr
kn
sn
sl
Diagram 4.7 Number of root morphemes with the 'pejorative' feature.
0
5
10
15
20
25
k
spr
nj
mj
st
sp
sk
str
bj
sv
sm
vr
Comments on the feature 'pejorative'
As stated above, pj- is the cluster with the highest percentage of
pejorative root morphemes. All two-consonant clusters containing a jphoneme are pejorative and to quite a high degree.
Looking at absolute figures, clusters beginning with s – especially sl- snand skr- – are dominating among the pejorative morphemes. Sl- is by far
connected with the greatest number of pejorative morphemes.
4.3.2 Sound
The semantic feature 'sound' ranks as number 2 in sound symbolic
frequency (cf. diagram 4.5). Diagram 4.8 shows that fn- is the cluster
with the highest proportion of morphemes having the feature 'sound'. Fnis a lexically infrequent cluster and thus the tendency from 'pejorative'
and is repeated: lexically infrequent clusters tend to be highly sound
symbolic. Fn- is also the most sound symbolic cluster of all (100%)
counting the different semantic features.
100
fl
fr
pl
gl
fj
sk
kr
br
skr
sm
sn
mj
bj
kl
kv
gn
kn
skv
fn
Diagram 4.8 Percent root morphemes with the feature 'sound' for different clusters.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
st
pr
tr
The morphemes with the feature 'sound' for the clusters are shown in
table 4.4 (the absolute number of root morphemes for each cluster is
placed after every cluster). The clusters are presented after descending
relative frequency (cf. diagram 4.8):
Table 4.4 The morphemes with the feature 'sound', the initial consonant
clusters involved and their absolute frequencies.
fn-: fnissa (giggle), fnittra (giggle), fnysa
(snort)
skv-: skval (pouring), skvalp (lapping)
kn-: knacka (knock), knaka (creak), knall
(bang), knapra (nibble), knarr (creaking),
knastra (crackle), knatter (rattle), knirka
(creak), knirra (creak), knistra (crackle),
knittra (crackle), knorr (grumbling), knot
(murmuring), knyst (the least sound),
knäppa (click)
gn-: gnissla (squeak), gnoding (a fish with a
grumbling sound), gnägga (whinny), gnälla
(squeak)
kv-: kvacka (quack), kvarka (strangles),
kvida (whimper), kvillra (twitter), kvirra
(grumble), kvitter (chirp), kväda (sing),
kväka (croak)
kl-: klafs (squelch), klamp (tramp), klang
(clang), klappa (knock), klappra (klatter),
klatsch (crack), klick (lump), klifs (squelch),
kling (ringing), klink (tinkling), klirra (jingle),
klocka (bell), klucka (cluck), klämta (toll),
kläpp (clapper)
bj-: bjällra (bell)
mj-: mjau (meow)
sn-: snarka (snore), snarpa (creak), snarra
(burr), snattra (quack), snusa (sniff),
snyfta (sob), snyta (blow one's nose),
snäppa (click), snärp (duck's sound),
snörvla (snuffle)
102
3
2
15
4
8
15
1
1
10
sm-: smack (smack), smaska (guzzle),
smatter clatter), smätta (flick)
skr-: skramla (rattle), skrap (scraping),
skrälla (blare)
br-: braka (crash), brassa (fire away),
brum (grumble), brus (buzz), bräka (bleat),
bröl (growl)
kr-: krafsa (scratch), krakel (row), kras
(crack), krasch (crash), kraxa (croak),
krysta (bear down), kråka (crow), krämta
(hawk)
sk-: skall (barking), skalla (resound), skallra
(rattle), skorr (burr), skott (shot), skångra
(vibrate)
fj-: fjärta (fart)
gl-: glam (laughing and talking), glissando,
gläfs (yelp)
pl-: pladask (flop), plask (splash), pling
(ting-a-ling), plums (plop)
fr-: frasa (rustle), frusta (snort), fräsa (hiss)
fl-: flabb (cackle), flöjt (flute)
tr-: trumma (drum), trumpet
(trumpet)
pr-: prassel (rustle), prutt (fart)
st-: stampa (stamp), stepp (tap-dance),
stön (groan)
4
3
6
8
6
1
3
4
3
2
2
2
3
The list (as well as diagrams 4.8 and 4.9) shows that kn- is frequent both
percentally and absolutely.
Comments on the feature 'sound'
Diagram 4.9 shows how many root morphemes have the feature 'sound',
in absolute figures. Four of the five largest ones begin with k: kl-, kn-,
kv- and kr-. Kl-, kn- and kv- are also percentally (cf. diagram 4.8)
among the clusters more dominating for the feature 'sound'.
103
bj
skv
fl
pr
tr
st
gl
fr
fn
skr
sm
pl
gn
sk
br
kr
kv
sn
kn
kl
Diagram 4.9 Number of root morphemes with the feature 'sound' for different clusters.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
mj
fj
4.3.3 Long thin form
The feature 'long thin form' ranks as number 3 in sound symbolic
frequency according to diagram 4.5. This is one of the many 'form'features.
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
sv
sk
st
tv
tr
sn
sl
sp
spr
str
spj
0
Diagram 4.10 Percent of the feature 'long thin form' for different
clusters.
Diagram 4.10 shows that the semantic feature 'long thin form' is
dominated by three three-consonant clusters: spj-, str-, and spr-. All
these begin with s (a fact of all Swedish initial three consonant clusters)
just as all but two of the other clusters, namely sp-, sl-, sn-, st-, sk- and
sv-. The only ones that do not begin with s are tr- and tv-. ( However, t
is a dental like s.) Again the highest ranked cluster spj- is a lexically very
infrequent cluster.
The morphemes with the feature 'long thin form' for the clusters are
shown in table 4.5 (the absolute number of root morphemes for each
cluster are placed after every cluster). The clusters are presented after
descending relative frequency (cf. diagram 4.10).
105
Table 4.5 The morphemes with the feature 'long thin form', the initial
consonant clusters involved and their absolute frequencies.
spj-: spjut (spear), spjäla (lath)
str-: streamer (streamer), streck (stroke),
stretch (stretch), strigel (strop), stril
(nozzle), strimla (strip), strimma (streak),
stripa (wisp), strut (cone), strå (straw),
stråk (band), stråle (ray), stråt (way),
sträcka (stretch), sträng (string), ström
(stream), strössel (sprinkles)
spr-: spricka (crack), springa (narrow
opening), sprint (pin), sprits (squirt),
sprund (slit), spröjs (window-bar),
spröt (rib)
sp-: spaljé (trellis), spalt (column),
spant (rib), sparre (rafter), sparris
(asparagus), spatel (spatula), spene (dug),
spenslig (slender), spetig (skinny), spets
(point), spett (spit), spigg (stickleback), spik
(nail), spila (spike ling), spindel (spider),
spinkig (thin), spinna (spin), spira (spire),
spole (bobbin), spont (tongue), spång
(foot-bridge), spänta (split wood), spö (twig)
sl-: sladd (cord), slamsa (rag), slana (scaffold
pole), slang (tube), slank (slender), slant
(a fishing rod), slejf (strap), slimmad (fitted),
slinga (coil), slips (tie), slits (slit), släde (sleigh)
sn-: snabel (trunk), snigel (snail), snilja
(a thread), snitsel (paperstrip), sno (twine),
snodd (cord), snok (grass snake), snorkel
(snorkel), snugga (cutty), snöre (string)
tr-: tratt (funnel), tross (hawser), truta
(pout), tryne (snout), tråd (thread), tråg
(trough), trål (trawl), träns (braid)
tv-: tvinna (twine)
st-: stake (stake), stav (staff), sticka
(splinter), stift (pin), stig (path), stilett
(stiletto), stock (log), stolpe (pole), stylta
106
2
17
7
23
12
10
8
1
(stilt), stång (pole), stör (stake), stötta
(prop)
sk-: skakel (shaft), skalm (shaft), skalpell
(scalpel)
sv-: svabba (swab), svans (tail)
12
3
2
25
20
15
10
5
tv
sv
spj
sk
spr
tr
sn
st
sl
str
sp
0
Diagram 4.11 Number of morphemes with the feature 'long thin form'
for different clusters.
Comments on the feature 'long thin form'.
Diagram 4.11 shows that sp- is the largest cluster, in absolute figures, for
the semantic feature 'long thin form'.
4.3.4 Quick or strong movement9
Diagram 4.12 shows that fl- has the highest percent of morphemes having
the feature 'quick or strong movement'. Fl- is a quite large cluster. In
second place comes spr- which is a lexically infrequent cluster even if it
is not extremely small. Vr- in third place is also lexically infrequent.
The morphemes with the feature 'quick or strong movement' for the
clusters are shown in table 4.6 (the absolute number of root morphemes
9 The reason for collapsing quick movement and strong movement is that in some root
morphemes both these meanings are present (although in others only one is present).
However, it seems cumbersome to make three categories instead of one.
107
for each cluster are placed after every cluster). The clusters are presented
according to descending relative frequency (cf. diagram 4.12).
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
st
sp
kr
fr
tr
sk
kn
sl
skv
fn
gn
sv
vr
spr
fl
0
Diagram 4.12 Percentage 'quick or strong movement' for different
clusters.
Table 4.6 The morphemes with the feature 'quick or strong movement',
the initial consonant clusters involved, and their absolute frequencies.
fl-: flacka (rove), fladdra (flutter), flagga
(flag) flamma (flame), flanera (be out for a
stroll), flaxa (flutter), flimra (flicker), fluga
(fly), fluktuation (fluctuation), flyga (fly), fly
(flee), flyta (float), flytta (move), flåsa
(puff) fläkta (fan), flämta (pant), flänga
(be dashing about), flöda (flow)
spr-: sprallig (frolicsome), sprattla
(flounder), spritta (jump), sprudla (bubble),
spruta (spurt), sprutt (speed)
vr-: vricka (scull), vrida (twist), vräka
(heave)
sv-: svaja (swing), svalla (surge), svepa
(sweep), sving (swing), svirvel (swivel),
svämma (overflow), sväng (sweep),
svärm (swarm), sväva (float)
108
18
6
3
9
gn-: gnida, (rub) gno (rub), gnugga (rub)
fn-: fnatta (run about))
skv-: skvimpa (splash to and fro)
sl-: sladda (skid), slinka (slip), slinta (slide),
slipprig (slippery), slira (skid), slita (pull),
slugga (beat), slunga (fling), slänga (throw)
kn-: knixa (bob), knyck (jerk)
sk-: skaka (shake), skalv (quake), skippa
(skip)
tr-: tromb (tornado), tromla (rotating
cylindrical sieve), trumla (treat
something by enclosing it in a rotating
drum)
fr-: frossa (the shivers), frusa (gush)
kr-: kratsa (scrape), kränga (heave over)
sp-: spasm (spasm), spurt (spurt)
st-: studsa (bounce), stöppla (give painted
surface a certain look by striking a brush
against it), stöt (thrust)
3
1
1
9
2
3
3
2
2
2
3
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
fn
skv
sp
kr
kn
fr
sk
gn
st
tr
vr
spr
sl
sv
fl
0
Diagram 4.13 Number of morphemes with the feature 'quick and strong
movement' for different clusters.
109
str
dr
sn
pl
sp
sv
bl
sl
kl
sm
spr
skv
Diagram 4.14 Percent root morphemes with the feature 'wetness' for different clusters.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
kr
Comments on
movement'.
the
feature
'quick
or
strong
Diagram 4.13 shows that fl- has by far the greatest number of
morphemes with the feature 'quick and strong movement'. Fl- is then
most frequent both absolutely and percentally.
4.3.5 Wetness
The last semantic feature to be examined is 'wetness', which ranks as
number 5 in sound symbolic frequency according to diagram 4.5.
Diagram 4.14 shows that skv- is the cluster with the highest proportion of
morphemes having the feature wetness. (Almost half of the morphemes
beginning with skv- have the feature 'wetness', cf. table 4.16) The next to
largest cluster, sm-, has only 13% morphemes with this feature. The
cluster skv- is small and contains a total of ten root morphemes. The
morphemes with the 'wetness' feature for the clusters are the following
(the absolute number of root morphemes for each cluster are placed after
every cluster). The clusters are presented according to descending relative
frequency (cf. diagram 4.14).
Table 4.7 The morphemes with the feature 'wetness', the initial consonant
clusters involved, and their absolute frequencies.
skv-: skval (gush), skvalta (ripple), skvimpa
(splash), skvätt (drop)
spr-: sprej (spray), sprinkler (sprinkler),
sprudla (bubbla), spruta (spurt)
sm-: smegma (secretion), smet (sludge),
smetana (a sour thick cream), smink
(make-up), smälta (melt), smörja (grease)
kl-: klabb (stick), kladd (daub), klafs
(squelch), klena (daub), kleta (daub), klibba
(stick), klick (daub), klifs (squelch), klucka
(gurgle), klunk (gulp)
sl-: slabba (splash), slafsa (squelch),
slam (ooze), slask (slush), slatt (drop), slem
(slime), slicka (lick), slipprig (slippery), slisk
(sweet stuff), sluring (soup), slurk (swig),
111
4
4
6
10
sluss (sluice)
bl-: blaska (splash), blod (blood), bläck (ink),
blöt (wet)
sv-: svabba (swab), svett (sweat), svämma
(overflow)
sp-: spackel (putty), spad (liquid), sperma
(sperm), spilla (spill), spola (flush), spott
(spittle), sputum (phlegm)
pl-: plask (splash), plums (plop), plurr
(water)
sn-: snaskig (smutty), snigel (snail), snor
(snot), snuva (cold)
dr-: dregel (dribble), droppa (drip)
str-: strila (sprinkle), ström (stream)
kr-: kram (cloggy), kräm (cream)
12
4
3
7
3
4
2
2
2
Comments on the feature 'wetness'
Diagram. 4.15. shows in absolute numbers how many morphemes have
the feature 'wetness' for each cluster. The largest cluster is sl- (twelve
instances) followed by kl- (ten instances). 8 of the 13 'wetness' clusters
begin with s. Three begin with an unvoiced stop and two begin with a
voiced stop.
Summary of and discussion of the five most
frequent features
As stated above, skv- is the cluster with the highest percentage of
'wetness' root morphemes. This cluster only contains ten morphemes so –
as well as for the pejorative root morphemes – small clusters are
proportionally more utilized for sound symbolism. The clusters sl-, kl-,
sp-, sm-, skv-, spr-, sn-, bl-, pl-, and sv- are most utilized for the
meaning 'wetness', i.e. s or initial unvoiced plosives are preferred. Sland kl- (both ending with l) have the highest number of root morphemes
with the feature 'wetness'.
112
sl
kl
sp
sm
skv
sn
bl
spr
sv
pl
kr
dr
Diagram 4.15 Number of root morphemes with the feature 'wetness' for different clusters.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
str
The cluster sl- is the most frequent sound symbolic cluster for both
'pejorative' and 'wetness'.
Looking at absolute figures, clusters beginning with s, especially sl- sn-,
and skr-, are dominating among the 'pejorative' morphemes. Sl- has by
far the greatest number of pejorative morphemes.
Similar results for cluster types were obtained for other clusters : 'light'
is dominated by voiced plosives + l or n: bl-, gl-, gn- (dl-, bn-, dn- are
not allowed in Swedish)10 , 'bad (negative) mood' is constrained to some
plosives + r: gr-, tr-, vr- 11 and 'wetness' is dominated by: sl-, kl-, sp-,
sm-, skv-, spr-, sn-, bl-, pl-, sv-, i.e. s and initial unvoiced plosives are
preferred (the only exception is bl-). The phoneme l is also quite
common.
10
There are root morphemes beginning with other clusters that have been classified as
‘light’ but these mainly concern quality of colour: bjärt (gaudy), gräll (glaring),
prunkande (dazzling), prålig (garish).
11 There is only one exception: knarrig (creaky).
114
4.3.6 The most sound symbolic clusters
Table 4.8 shows which the most frequent clusters are, for every meaning.
Table 4.8. The most sound symbolic clusters in absolute numbers and
proportionally, for the five most frequent meanings.
meaning
'pejorative'
freq % examples
in %
in
absolute
numbers
pjsl24
16 sladder
(gossip), slok
(bloke),
slödder (riffraff)
'sound'
kl-,
kn-
15
'long thin
form'
sp-
23
'quick or
strong
movement'
fl-
18
'wetness'
sl-
12
13, klang (clang),
19 klirra (jingle)
knarra
(creak),
knittra
(crackle)
17 spant (rib),
spett (spit)
spö (twig)
19 fladdra
(flutter),
flamma
(flame),
flimra
(flicker).
fläkta (fan)
8 slask (slush)
slem (slime)
slipprig
(slippery)
115
%
freq examples
71
5
fn-
33
3
spj-
33
2
spjut (spear),
spjäla (lath)
fl-
19
18
skv-
40
4
fladdra
(flutter),
flamma
(flame),
flimra
(flicker)
fläkta (fan)
skval (gush),
skvalta
(ripple),
skvimpa
(splash)
pjoller
(babble),
pjosk
(coddling),
pjunk
(coddling)
fnissa
(giggle),
fnysa (snort)
The information given in table 4.8, for the five most frequent meanings,
will now be explained. For the feature 'pejorative' (which is the most
frequent meaning, see diagram 4.5) the most high frequent cluster (in the
sense of the greatest number of roots) is sl-, and it has a frequency of 24
root morphemes. Sl- can therefore be said to be a very pejorative cluster.
However, many words begin with sl- and only 16% of these are in fact
pejorative. It is also interesting to look at which cluster is dominated to
the highest degree by the feature 'pejorative'. This turns out to be pjwhere 5 root morphemes (71% of the root morphemes beginning with
pj-) are pejorative. So, in the sense of being dominated by a certain
meaning, pj- can be said to be the most pejorative cluster. The same
comparisons are made for the remaining 4 semantic features.
The clusters that are most frequent, in absolute numbers, show a strong
tendency to end with l. The clusters that are most frequent proportionally
show a weak tendency to end with j. In both groups the clusters begin
with a voiceless obstruent.
4.4 Frequent clusters
So far we have studied how clusters are distributed over different
meanings. We will now look at what meanings different clusters hold.
The following section shows how different meanings are distributed over
different clusters. The clusters examined are the most frequent in absolute
numbers: sl-, sn-, kn-, kr- (cf. diagram 4.3) and some of the most
frequent percentally: fn-, kn-, gn-, spr-, pj- (cf. diagram 4.4).
Also those clusters that are almost unique for a certain meaning will be
discussed, e.g. 'pejorative' has the unique cluster fj-, i.e., fj- is almost
only 'pejorative'. Fl- is to a high degree 'quick or strong movement', fn'pejorative', gl- 'light', bl- 'light' or 'gaze', kr- 'winding form', kn'round form', skr- 'pejorative' and 'destruction', sl- 'pejorative', str'long thin form', br- 'sound' and 'destruction', gr- 'bad mood' or 'hollow
form', (vr- 'bad mood', tr- 'bad mood'), kl- is 'wetness', 'short-wide
form' or 'adhesion', kv- is 'suffocation', mj- 'softness', sk- 'hardness',
skv- 'wetness', sl- 'slackness' and sp-, st- and str- are 'long thin form'
(cf. table 4.16).
116
pot. movem.
smooth surf.
beat
talking
quick or
strong movem
slackness
long thin
wetness
pejorative
% m.comp/all
Diagram 4.16 Semantic features of the cluster sl-. Percentages of semantic features for all root morphemes.
0
5
10
15
20
25
walking
4.4.1 The cluster slThe first cluster to be studied is sl-, the largest cluster in absolute
numbers. Diagram 4.16 shows the semantic features of the consonant
cluster sl-. The words (representing root morphemes) of the dominating
features are shown in table 4.8. The absolute frequencies (not the
percentages) of the semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 4.8 The sound symbolic morphemes of the sl- cluster, the semantic
features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'pejorative': slabba (splash),
slabbertacka (gossipmonger),
sladdra (chatter), slafs (sloppiness)
slampa (slut), slams (slovenliness),
slarvig (slipshod), slas (lazy and
careless person), slasa (walk
heavily and shuffling), slask (slush),
slatt (drop), slattrig (slack), slidder
(gossip), slinka (wench), slisk
(sweet stuff), sloka (droop), sludder
(slurred speech), slum (slum), slusk
(shabby looking fellow), slyna
(bitch), slyngel (young rascal), slö
(sluggish), slödder (riff-raff),
slösa (waste)
'wetness': slabba (splash), slafs
(sloppiness), slam (ooze), slask
(slush), slatt (drop), slem (slime),
slicka (lick), slipprig (slippery), slisk
(sweet stuff), sluring (a soup), slurk
(swig), sluss (sluice)
(cf. discussion in 1.5)
'long thin form': sladd (cord),
slamsa (rag), slana (scaffold pole),
slang (tube), slank (slender), slant
(a fishing rod), slejf (strap), slimmad
(fitted), slinga (coil), slips (tie), slits (slit),
släde (sleigh).
118
24
12
12
'slackness': slack (slack), sladdrig
(flabby), slak (slack), slamsa (rag),
slana (scaffold pole), slang (tube),
slankig (flaccid), slapp (slack), sliddrig
(flabby), slinkig (slabby), sloka (droop)
'quick or strong movement': sladda
(skid), slinka (slip), slinta (slip),
slipprig (slippery), slira (skid), slita
(tear), slugga (slug), slunga (fling), slänga
(fling)
'talking': slabbertacka (gossipmonger),
sladdra (chatter), slattrig (gossiping),
slidder (gossip), sludder (slurred
speech)
'beat': slag (beat), slå (beat), slägga
(sledge hammer)
'smooth surface': slipa (polish), slät
(smooth), slätt (plain)
'potential movement': slutta (slant),
slänt (slope)
'walking': slasa (walk heavily and
shuffling), släntra (saunter)
11
9
5
3
3
2
2
The semantic feature 'slackness' is unique for this cluster.
The relations between some of the different meanings of sl- are discussed
below in 4.6.
Sl- has a different meaning profile than sn- (cf. diagram 4.17). However,
they are both dominated by the feature 'pejorative'.
4.4.2 The cluster snThe second most sound symbolic cluster, in absolute numbers, is sn-.
Diagram 4.17 shows the semantic features of this consonant cluster.
119
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Diagram 4.17 Semantic features of the cluster sn-. Percentages of
semantic features for all root morphemes.
In table 4.9 the words (representing root morphemes) of the dominating
features are shown. The absolute frequencies (not the percentages) of the
semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 4.9 The sound symbolic morphemes of the sn- cluster, the semantic
features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'pejorative': snafs (dirt), snaskig (smutty),
snatta (pinch), snicksnack (chit-chat),
sniken (greedy), snobb (dandy), snorkig
(snooty), snusk (smuttiness), snylta
(sponge), snål (greedy), snärta
(young thing), snöd (sordid), snöplig
(inglorious)
'sound': snarka (snore), snarpa (creak),
snarra (burr), snattra (quack), snusa
120
13
slang
diminutive
winding form
way of walking
talking
small end f o r m
wetness
quickness
long thin f o r m
sound
pejorative
0
(sniff), snyfta (sob), snyta (blow nose),
snäppa (click) , snärp (duck´s sound),
snörvla (snuffle)
'long thin form': snabel (trunk), snigel
(snail), snilja (a thread) , snitsel (paper
strip), sno (twine), snodd (cord), snok (grass
snake), snorkel (snorkel), snultra (a long
thin fish), snöre (string)
'quickness': snabb (quick), snappa (snatch),
snar (who reacts without delay), sno
(twine), snudig (quick), snärj (hurry)
'talking': snacka (chat), snicksnack
(chit-chat), snubba (rebuke), snäsa (snub)
'wetness': snaskig (smutty), snigel (snail),
snor (snot), snuva (head cold)
'small end form': snagga (clip short), snibb
(tip), snip (lip), snopp (tip)
'winding form': snirkel (scroll), snurra
(twist), snäcka (shell)
'diminutive': snitt (cut), snugga (cutty),
snutt (small piece)
'slang': snofsa upp (make elegant), snubbe
(person), snut (cop)
'walking': snava (trip), snubbla (trip)
10
10
6
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
4.4.3 The cluster knThe following diagram (4.18) shows the semantic features of the cluster
kn-, the third largest cluster in absolute numbers.
The words (representing root morphemes) of the semantic features of knare shown in table 4.10. The absolute frequency (not the percentages) of
the semantic features are shown to the right.
121
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
quick or
strong movem
beat
diminutive
way of walk
together
pejorative
sound
round form
0
Diagram 4.18 Semantic features of the cluster kn-. Percentages of
semantic features for all root morphemes.
Table 4.10 The sound symbolic morphemes of the kn- cluster, the
semantic features involved and their absolute frequencies.
'sound': knacka (knock), knaka (creak)
, knall (bang), knapra (nibble), knarr
(creaking) , knastra (crackle), knatter (rattle)
, knirka (creak), knirra (creak), knistra
(crackle), knittra (crackle), knorr
(grumbling), knot (murmuring), knyst
(the least sound), knäppa (click)
'round form': knagg (wooden stick), knalle
(hillock), knapp (button), knast (twig in
122
15
wood), knick (sharp curve on pipe), knoge
(fist), knollrig (frizzy), knop (knot), knopp
(bud), knorr (curl), knota (bone), knottra
(goose-pimples), knubbig (chubby), knödel
(cooked bun of patatoes), knöl (bump)
'pejorative': knackig (quite bad), knal
(economically weak), knasig (crazy), kneg
(job), kneken (vara på kneken: be down
one's luck), knodd (bounder), knorva (make
creased and wrinkled), knutte (person who
is onesidedly focused on a certain activity),
knöl (bastard), knös (rich fellow)
'putting together': knipa (pinch), knippa
(bunch), knipsa (staple), knut (knot),
knyckla (crumple up), knyppla (make lace),
knyta (tie)
'walking': knaggla (move forward slowly
and with difficulty), knalla (trot), knata
(run), knoga (walk laboriously)
'diminutive': knatte (little fellow), knott
(gnat), knåp (finicky job)
'beat': knocka (knock out), knuff (push),
knäck (crack)
'quick or strong movement': knixa (bob),
knyck (jerk)
15
10
7
4
3
3
2
Kn- contains many words with the meaning 'round form', but the cluster
is not unique for this meaning.
Kn- also belongs to the clusters in the next section, since it is also one of
the 4 most sound symbolic cluster percentally.
123
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
wetness
quick or
strong movem
destruction
rough surf
thin form
way of walking
sound
pejorative
winding form
0
Diagram 4.19 Semantic features of the cluster kr-. Percentages of
semantic features for all root morphemes.
4.4.4 The cluster krThe last of the four largest clusters (in absolute numbers) is kr-, shown in
diagram 4.19. In table 4.11 the words (representing root morphemes) of
the semantic features of kr- are shown. The absolute frequency (not the
percentages) of the semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 4.11 The sound symbolic morphemes of the kr- cluster, the
semantic features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'winding form': krans (wreath),
kringelikrokar (lots of bends in different
124
directions), kringla (pretzel), krok (hook),
krokan (croquembouche), krulla (curl), krum
(crooked), krumbukt (windings), krumelur
(flourish), krumpen (crooked and bent from
age or disease), krusa (curl), krusiduller
(ornaments), krycka (crutch), kråma (prance
about), kräkla (crosier), kräla (crawl),
krök (bend)
'pejorative': krafs (trash), krake (wretch),
kram (trash), krams (trash), kratta (funk),
kreta (badly whittle), krimskrams (knick-knacks),
kruserlig (ceremonious), krångel (fuss), kräk
(wretch)
'sound': krafsa (scratch), krakel (row), kras
(crack), krasch (crash), kraxa (croak), krysta
(bear down), kråka (crow), krämta (hawk)
'thin form': krakmandel (soft-shell
almond), krokett (croquette), krusta (crust),
krustad (croustade)
'walking': kravla (crawl), krylla (crawl with),
krypa (crawl), kräla (crawl)
'rough surface structure': kratta (rake),
krås (ruffle), kräpp (crepe)
'destruction': kracka (decompose molecules
through heating), krackelera (crackled), krossa
(crush)
'wetness': kram (cloggy), kräm (cream)
'quick or strong movement': kratsa
(scrape), kränga (heave over)
17
10
8
4
4
3
3
2
2
Kr- is dominated by the unusual semantic feature 'winding form' and the
cluster and meaning are almost uniquely connected. (However 'winding
form' also occurs in some root morpheme with sn-.)
The clusters described above are the four largest ones. Taken together
they are dominated by the semantic features 'pejorative' and 'sound'.
125
The largest clusters, percentally
The next group of clusters that are to be studied more closely are the ones
that are the percentally most sound symbolic, cf. diagram 4.4.
4.4.5 The cluster fnFn- is the initial consonant cluster with the largest percentage of sound
symbolic root morphemes. The percentages of the semantic features are
shown in diagram 4.20.
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
dryness
thin form
quick or strong
movem
sound
pejorative
0
Diagram 4.20 Semantic features of the cluster fn-. Percentages of
semantic features for all root morphemes.
The words (representing root morphemes) of the semantic features of fnare presented in table 4.12. The absolute number of words (not the
percentages) of the semantic features are shown to the right. For all
lexically infrequent clusters, i.e. clusters containing less than 13 root
126
morphemes, also root morphemes with the frequency 1 are counted (cf.
chapter 3).
Table 4.12 The sound symbolic morphemes of the fn- cluster, the
semantic features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'pejorative': fnask (prostitute), fnatta (run
about), fnoskig (dotty), fnurra (cf. grumpy)
'sound': fnissa (giggle), fnittra (giggle),
fnysa (snort)
'quick or strong movement': fnatta (run about)
'thin form': fnasig (chapped)
'dryness': fnöske (tinder)
4
3
1
1
1
The cluster fn- is dominated by 'pejorative'. All fn- root morphemes are
sound symbolic. (However, as shown in diagrams 4.6 and 4.7, the feature
'pejorative' is spread over many clusters.)
4.4.6 The cluster knKn- is the initial consonant cluster with the fourth largest percentage of
sound symbolic root morphemes. It is also the third largest cluster in
absolute numbers. The diagrams and the list of root morphemes can be
studied above in 4.4.3.
4.4.7 The cluster gnGn- is the initial consonant cluster with the second largest percentage of
sound symbolic root morphemes. The percentages of the semantic features
are shown in diagram 4.21.
The words (representing root morphemes) of the semantic features of gnare presented in table 4.13. The absolute number of words (not the
percentages) of the semantic features are shown to the right.
127
25
20
15
10
5
light
smooth surf
quick or
strong movem
pejorative
sound
talking
0
Diagram 4.21 Semantic features of the cluster gn-. Percentages of
semantic features for all root morphemes.
Table 4.13 The sound symbolic morphemes of the gn- cluster, the
semantic features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'talking': gnabb (bickering), gnat (nagging),
gnola (hum), gny (din), gnöla (klaga)
'sound': gnissla (squeak), gnoding (a fish
with a grumbling sound), gnägga (whinny),
gnälla (squeak)
'pejorative': gnat (nagging), gneta (stint),
gnidare (miser)
'smooth surface structure': gnida (rub),
gno (rub), gnugga (rub)
'quick or strong movement': gnida,(rub),
gno (rub), gnugga (rub)
'light': gnista (spark), gnistra (sparkle)
128
5
4
3
3
3
2
The semantic features of gn- are primarily 'talking' and 'sound', which
semantically are very close. An analysis of relations between some of the
semantic features of gn- are presented in 4.6.
4.4.8 The cluster sprThe initial consonant cluster with the fifth largest percentage of sound
symbolic root morphemes is spr-. The percentages of the semantic
features are shown in diagram 4.22:
25
20
15
10
5
wetness
separation
movement
quick or strong
long thin form
0
Diagram 4.22 Semantic features of the cluster spr-. Percentages of
semantic features for all root morphemes.
129
Table 4.14 shows the words (representing root morphemes) of the
semantic features of spr-. The absolute number of words (not the
percentages) of the semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 4.14 The sound symbolic morphemes of the spr- cluster, the
semantic features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'long thin form': spricka (crack), springa
(narrow opening), sprint (pin), sprits (squirt),
sprund (slit), spröjs (window-bar), spröt (rib)
'quick or strong movement': sprallig
(frolicsome), sprattla (flounder), spritta
(jump), sprudla (bubble), spruta (spurt),
sprutt (speed)
'separation': sprej (spray), spreta (sprawl),
sprida (spread), sprinkler (sprinkler),
spränga (burst), sprätta (flick)
'wetness': sprej (spray), sprinkler (sprinkler),
sprudla (bubbla), spruta (spurt)
7
6
6
4
Spr- is quite unique for the meaning 'separation'. (The meaning does,
however, occur in sp- and spl-).
4.4.9 The cluster pjPj- is the initial consonant cluster with the third largest percentage of
sound symbolic root morphemes. The percentages of the semantic
features are shown in the following diagram (4.23):
The words (representing root morphemes) of the semantic features of pjare presented in table 4.15. The absolute number of words (not the
percentages) of the semantic features are shown to the right.
130
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
pejorative
way of
talking
Diagram 4.23 Semantic features of the cluster pj-. Percentages of
semantic features for both root morphemes.
Table 4.15 The sound symbolic morphemes of the pj- cluster, the
semantic features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'pejorative': pjatt (squirt), pjoller (babble,
twaddle), pjosk (coddling), pjunk (coddling;
puling), pjåkig (mawkish, bad)
'sound': pjoller (babble, twaddle)
5
1
The cluster is clearly dominated by the feature 'pejorative'.
Summary for percentages
Also for the four percentally most sound symbolic clusters the semantic
features 'pejorative' and 'sound' are dominating, together with 'talking'.
Only the cluster spr- is deviating from this tendency. The cluster kn- is
among the most sound symbolic clusters, both in absolute numbers and
percentally.
4.5 Typical or unique meanings
In Table 4.16 all the clusters with typical or unique meanings are
presented. Clusters that are dominated by a certain meaning (e.g. 'quick
or strong movement' in fl-), or have a meaning which is almost unique
for that cluster (e.g. 'winding form': kr-), have those meanings in italics.
For small clusters, i.e. those with less than 13 root morphemes, also
meanings that have the frequency 1 are counted.
131
Table 4.16 Typical
or unique meanings
of initial clusters.
blpejorative
light
gaze
talking
wetness
round form
brsound
destruction
fjpejorative
sound
flquick or strong
movement
pejorative
thin form
sound
light
fnpejorative
sound
thin form
quick or strong
movement
dryness
gllight
smooth surface
structure
pejorative
gaze
33
8
9
5
4
4
3
11
6
5
7
6
1
36
18
8
6
2
2
10
4
3
1
1
1
45
14
7
6
6
diminutive
form
sound
gntalking
sound
pejorative
smooth surface
structure
quick or strong
movement
light
grhollow form
bad mood
pejorative
talking
klsound
short wide form
wetness
adhesion
pejorative
talking
knround form
sound
pejorative
putting together
walking
diminutive
beat
quick or strong
movement
krwinding form
132
5
4
3
20
5
4
3
3
3
2
21
8
6
7
5
51
15
11
10
6
6
3
59
15
15
10
7
4
3
3
2
53
17
pejorative
sound
walking
thin form
rough surface
structure
destruction
wetness
quick or strong
movement
kvsound
suffocation
destruction
diminutive
mjfine grain
soft consistency
sound
pejorative
pjpejorative
talking
skhardness
sound
long thin form
quick or strong
movement
pejorative
round form
skrtalking
pejorative
destruction
rough surface
structure
10
8
4
4
3
3
2
2
17
8
5
2
2
7
3
2
1
1
6
5
1
25
8
6
4
3
2
2
35
12
8
7
5
sound
skvwetness
sound
talking
pejorative
movement
slpejorative
wetness
long thin form
slackness
quick or strong
movement
talking
beat
smooth surface str
walking
potential
movement
snpejorative
long thin form
sound
quickness
talking
small end form
wetness
winding form
diminutive
slang
walking
splong thin form
wetness
jocular
3
9
4
2
1
1
1
83
24
12
12
11
9
5
3
3
2
2
62
13
10
10
6
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
47
thin form
gaze
quick or strong
movement
attitude
pejorative
diminutive
sprlong thin form
separation
quick or strong
movement
wetness
strlong thin form
walking
stiffness
wetness
light
pejorative
fine grain
trbad mood
long thin form
pejorative
walking
diminutive
round form
quick or strong
movement
talking
short wide form
sound
23
7
4
133
3
2
2
2
2
2
23
7
6
6
4
30
17
3
2
2
2
2
2
44
8
8
7
5
4
3
3
2
2
2
4.6 Patterns of semantic features
The different semantic features of a certain consonant cluster often do not
only constitute a list of haphazard features, but instead they are related.
These kinds of relations between phonesthemes (e.g. sl-:'smooth surface
structure' (slät) -> 'quick or strong movement (slira, slingra)) can also be
found within the same phonestheme (e.g. bl-: 'light' (blixt) –>'reflecting
surface structure potentially giving light' (blank), at a more detailed level
of analysis. In other words, there are many clusters which contain root
morphemes that have similar, but not exactly the same, semantic features.
These features are related indexically or iconically and can be seen as
belonging to the same meaning potential and activated in different
contexts. This is especially striking in the case of root morphemes
connected to 'light', beginning with the clusters gl-, bl- and gn-. Most of
these words have been classified as 'light' or 'gaze' in the analysis above,
but as shown here they could be further analyzed. Some root morphemes
can denote light, others perception of light, yet others potentiality for
perception of light, etc. The different relations to 'light' are paraphrased
below. Almost all relations between phonesthemic meanings can be
described as some kind of potentiality. Potentiality is not a semantic
feature but it describes the relation between different meanings. By
potentiality I mean a relation between meanings where one meaning
describes a possible prerequisite for another meaning, e.g. form can be
seen from the perspective of being able to let through a bit of light, or a
reflecting (glossy) surface can send out light, cf. the paraphrases below.
The emergence of these relations probably come from simultaneity in
perception, i.e. a kind of indexical relation. In some cases the relation is
iconic.
The structures are similar but not exactly parallel, so the clusters will be
presented one at a time:
gl'form through which light
potentially can be perceived'
glipa (narrow space), glugg
(aperture), glänt (slightly open),
glänta (glade)
134
'perception of light'
glana (stare), glo (stare), glutta
(take a glance), glimt (glimpse)
'production or source of light'
glans (lustre), glimma (gleam), glimra (gleam), glindra
(gleam), glisa (shine), glittra (glitter), glänsa (shine), glöd
(glow), gloria (halo), glåmig (pale)
'smooth surface that potentially
reflects light'
glas (glass), glasyr (glazing), glatt
(smooth), glimmer (gleaming),
glinder (a shiny trolling-spoon),
glaciär (glacier)
'movement on such a surface'
glida (glide)
135
bl'perception of light'
blick (gaze), bliga (stare), blänga
(glare), blända (blind), blind (blind),
blinka (blink)
'light'
blixt (lightning), blinka (twinkle), blänka
(flare), blek (pale)
(shine), blossa
'reflecting surface potentially giving light'
blank (shiny)
(iconic)
'light surface'
bläs (blaze), black (drab)
gn'momentary light'
gnista (spark), gnistra (sparkle)
'action which produces smooth surface'
gnida (rub), gno (rub), gnugga (rub)
136
'sound arising from, and simultaneous
with, such an action'
gnida (rub), gno (rub), gnugga (rub)
'similar sound arising from similar action'
gnissla (squeak)
'similar sounds arising from humans or
creatures'
gnabb (bickering), gnat (nagging),
gnoding (a murmuring fish), gnola
(hum), gny (din), gnägga (neigh), gnälla
(whine), gnöl (grumble)
In the last cluster we can see indexical and iconic relations between such
basic categories as 'sound', 'movement' and 'light', e.g. the relation
between the sound and the action is often simultaneous (indexical) or the
relation between this sound and another sound (like in gnissla) is likeness
(iconic). Gn- can, in other words, be used for other sounds than those
arising simultaneously with a polishing movement. These are synchronic
relations but one can imagine the historical changes through meaning
extension. (The etymological relations, as described in e.g. Hellquist
(1966), are not clear.)
Common for the three clusters is the meaning 'light', i. e. the process
which is the source for visual perception. It is of course central. Different
extensions of meaning from 'light' are possible. As can be seen, there are
"empty slots" in the meaning patterns for the clusters. For example, gndoes not have adjectives having to do with 'reflecting surface', only verbs
meaning 'producing reflecting surface'. And it does not have root
morphemes for 'perception of light'. These can be accidental gaps. A
speculative explanation of why gn- does not have words for 'perception
137
of light' is that these words often are verbs and that the verbs beginning
with gn- are used for the feature 'sound'.
Similar relations can be found for other semantic fields and for other
clusters, sometimes as different root morphemes beginning with a certain
cluster, sometimes as semantic features of a root morpheme. Meanings
often combined are e.g. 'sound' - 'movement' - 'destruction' (e.g. braka),
'destruction' - 'pejorative' (e.g bråte), 'wetness' - 'pejorative' (e.g.
slemmig), 'sound' - 'surface structure' (e.g skrovlig), etc, and the relation
between the meanings (except for 'wetness' - 'pejorative') is nearness in
space and time (indexical).
The semantic pattern of sl- is similar:
pejorative (slabba (splash), slafs
(sloppiness), slampa (slut), slarvig
(slipshod), slasa (walk lazily),
sladdrig (flabby))
wetness (slafsa (slop), slipprig (slipprig), slem (phlegm))
smooth surface structure (slipa
(polish), slät (smooth))
quick or strong movement (slinka
(slide), slinta (glide), slira (skid),
slingra (wind))
potential
movement
138
(slutta (slope),
slänt (slope))
long thin form (slang (tube),
slimmad (slimmed), slana (scaffold
pole), slejf (strap), slinga (coil), slips
(tie))
slackness (slamsa (rag), slankig
(limp), slana (scaffold pole), slejf
(strap), slinga (wreath), slips (tie))
The relations are the following:
Wetness causes smooth surface structure (index).
Smooth surface causes quick or strong movement (index).
That which moves quickly often has a long thin form (index).
That which has same form as long thin form is often slack (index).
Meaning hierarchies?
One aim of the analysis was to find meaning hierarchies within clusters,
e.g. that sound symbolism presupposes sound imitation, that movement
presupposes sound imitation, that wetness always implies pejorative, but
such strong claims can not be made. However, there are strong
tendencies:
For all 36 clusters 'pejorative' is the largest category, followed by
'sound'. As mentioned earlier, clusters are often both 'sound' (or
'talking') and 'pejorative'. Exceptions are br-, fr-, kv- which are
'sound' but not 'pejorative'. Spj-, spl-, spr- are neither 'sound' nor
'pejorative'.
Clusters with 'quick or strong movement' also have the semantic feature
'sound' (things that move quickly often sound) except for one cluster:
spr-. 'Wetness' is almost always co-occurring with 'sound imitation', also
probably due to the fact that wet things often sound.
139
Some clusters are used for a variety of meanings (sl-, kl-) while others
are more specialized on one meaning (fj-, pj-).
4.7 Discussion and conclusions
This chapter has shown that certain semantic features are connected with
certain initial consonant clusters, in different combinations and to
different extents. From the analysis of sound symbolism of the initial
consonant clusters of Swedish some general conclusions can be drawn:
* There is a difference between clusters in the number of root
morphemes that are motivated. This is partly due to how lexically
frequent the cluster is. There is also a difference between clusters in how
big a proportion of the root morphemes are motivated. Some clusters are
simply more used for motivated root morphemes. The variation is
between 8% (br-) and 100% (fn-). It seems clear that lexically infrequent
clusters are exploited for sound symbolism to a higher degree.
(One might ponder about the importance of total or percental number for
the language user's feeling of degree of motivation of a cluster.
Nevertheless this analysis has mostly dealt with percentages. Another
related issue is the issue of textual frequency of motivated root
morphemes, which has not been dealt with here.)
* The meaning profiles for most clusters differ. Different clusters (and
different cluster types) seem to be fitting for different (types of)
meanings.
* There are often, on a more detailed level of analysis, interesting
relations between the different root morphemes classified as belonging to
the same phonestheme, and sometimes there is a connection between the
different meanings of a cluster profile, see the analysis of gl-, bl- gnand sl- above. The meanings are related indexically or iconically and can
be seen as belonging to the same meaning potential and activated in
different contexts. It is a question of detail of analysis how many
meanings are described.
140
* There is also a frequency difference between the meanings. Some
meanings are quite frequent, e.g. 'sound' and 'pejorative', other meanings
are less frequent, e.g. 'adhesion' and 'round form'.
* Some meanings seem to combine more often with other meanings, e.g.
pejorative + walking or talking.
The next chapter will present an analysis of sound symbolism of final
consonant clusters and of vowels where phonesthemes connected with the
semantic features found in the analysis of initial consonant clusters will be
searched for. The results of the analysis of initial consonant clusters (as
well as that of final clusters) have been the base for the experiments with
neologisms presented in chapter 7. It was also the base for part of the
cross linguistic studies presented in chapter 6.
141
5. Analysis of final consonant
vowels and of combinations
clusters
and
It seems clear that a greater or lesser part of the sound symbolic
meaning of root morphemes can be attributed not only to an initial
consonant sequence but also to the final consonants, sometimes in
combination with vowels (in different positions). It could be possible
that the semantic feature 'quick or strong movement' of e. g. fladdra
(flutter) is attributable not only to fl- (cf. 4.3.4) but also to -dr-. For all
words ending in -dr- the dominating semantic feature is 'talking'
(bladdra (talk nonsense), pladdra (babble), sladdra (chatter), bluddra
(talk nonsense), sluddra (slur one's words) but also 'quick or strong
movement' (fladdra and bläddra (turn over the pages). So, in the case
of fladdra, fl- is most strongly tied to 'quick and strong movement', but
-dr- also adds to the meaning of the word. In addition it is possible that
the vowels add to the sound symbolic flavor of a word, and that a
neologism like fliddra would depict a yet quicker movement.
To facilitate understanding of the study, the reader is reminded of the
procedure of deciding which final clusters should be counted as tentative
phonesthemes (cf. 3.1). When there are at least two1 root morphemes
ending with the same cluster (which is sometimes followed by an
obligatory vowel, i. e. strictly speaking they are semifinal) and having
similar meaning (ascertained by key words), one phonestheme is
established. If there are roots (normally at least two of each) with
different, sound symbolic, meanings, different phonesthemes are
established, e.g. -mla 'talking' (svamla, mumla) and 'quick or strong
movement' (famla, vimla, tromla, fumla, rumla, drumla, tumla). It can
also be the case that words have clearly different meanings, e.g. blaska.
There is one meaning 'splash' and one pejorative meaning for
'newspaper'. This word is then counted as two roots, and the analysis
proceeds as above. In many cases a word has more than one meaning,
but only one of them is sound symbolic.
1 Or,
for lexically infrequent clusters, 1 root
143
5.1 Final clusters
It is not as easy to enumerate the final sequences as it is to list the initial
sequences. In final sequences, morphological structure has to be taken
into account since some sequences only occur in inflected or derived
forms, e.g. -ndsk in bondsk. Many forms are difficult to evaluate,
according to the discussion in Sigurd (1965, pp. 67–69), who adopts a
set of mechanical rules which exclude certain forms (secondary forms)
which can be assumed to break the natural phonotactic pattern.
Thus, for practical reasons, final clusters were studied in the following
ways. Primarily they were studied with the aid of 'Svensk
Baklängesordbok' (1981), which is a list of most Swedish lemmas2
(ordered alphabetically after the endings of the words only). The final
clusters that are followed by a have been analyzed, partly since the
clusters were easy to find in that way, but mainly because some clusters
cannot have word final position (e.g. C+r- and C+l-sequences). These
are mainly verbs. (In addition, roots from Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 4
(NFO4) were analyzed, see 5.3 and 5.5). The roots that were excerpted
were those that have one or more of the semantic features discussed
earlier. For this reason also single occurrences of final clusters with
these semantic features were registered. The aim has been to use
different materials in order to study as many roots as possible. Not all
final clusters are sound symbolic3 , as almost all initial clusters are.
The resulting 27 sound symbolic final clusters before a (semi final) are
shown in table 5.1 below. There, geminate consonants, and not only
consonant clusters, are included. The semantic features recurring more
than once for each final cluster are within brackets.
Table 5.1 The 27 sound symbolic final clusters (before a and preceded
by a short vowel), from Svensk Baklängesordbok. 100% indicates that
there is only one root. This root is in all indicated cases sound symbolic.
All other clusters have at least two roots with similar meaning (or, for
lexically infrequent clusters, 1 root) according to the method described
in 3.1.
2 Svensk Baklängesordbok contains lemmas from SAOL and from newspaper articles,
and does not exactly match Svensk Ordbok.
3 Approximately 22% of the final clusters from NFO4 are sound symbolic, cf. table
5.17.
144
%
/tS a/
/f:a/
/ska/
/bla/
/fla/
/Nla/
/l:a/
/mla/
/pla/
/rpla/
/spla/
/rla/
/sla/
/ampa/
/mpa/
/p:a/
/bra/
/dra/
/indra/
/lra/
/imra/
/r:a/
/tra/
/fsa/
/msa/
/lta/
(sound, quick or strong movement)
(slang4 , quick or strong movement)
(wetness, pejorative)
(talking)
(pejorative, talking)
(quick or strong movement)
(pejorative, round form, walking)
(quick or strong movement, talking, sound)
(quick or strong movement)
(sound)
(quick or strong movement)
(sound)
(sound, talking)
(walking)
(walking, pejorative, quick or strong
movement, short-wide form)
(quick or strong movement)
(talking)
(talking, quick or strong movement)
(light)
(quick or strong movement, sound, talking)
(light)
(quick or strong movement, sound, talking)
(quick or strong movement, sound, talking,
pejorative)
(pejorative, quick or strong movement,
walking, sound)
(long thin form, pejorative, talking, quick or
strong movement)
(walking, quick or strong movement)
4 'Slang'
5 1/1
1/15 100%
1/1 100%
1/1 100%
1/1
is a stylistic feature and thus belongs to another dimension, cf. 4.2.3.
means that there is one root morpheme which is sound symbolic.
145
100%
/sta/
(talking, quick or strong movement)
Examples of sound symbolic root morphemes ending with these final
clusters from Svensk Baklängesordbok are found in table 5.2 below.
Some final clusters are rare and occur in only one or a few words. These
are (translated in the table below): klatscha, ratscha, rutscha (three out of
four root morphemes), knaggla, raggla, traggla (three out of four root
morphemes), porla, sorla (two out of four root morphemes) and stöppla,
sörpla, haspla, slabbra (there is only one root morpheme for each of these
last four final clusters).
146
Table 5.2 Sound symbolic roots,
translation and categorization.
klatscha
ratscha
rutscha
haffa
blaffa
klaffa
fiffa
sniffa
piffa
skoffa
roffa
buffa
skuffa
luffa
fluffa
knuffa
puffa
ruffa
gruffa
tuffa
töffa
blaska
plaska
sjaska
slaska
smaska
snaska
vaska
babbla
rabbla
gaffla
taffla
fiffla
ruffla
knaggla
traggla
dangla
rangla
skrangla
dingla
crack
rip
slide
sound
sound
quick or strong
movement
nab
slang
large (ugly) color slang
patch
tally
slang
smarten (up)
slang
sniff
slang
smarten (up)
slang
shovel
slang
rob
slang
nudge
slang
push
slang
tramp
slang
fluff (up)
slang
push
quick or strong
movement
push
quick or strong
movement
foul
slang
squabble
slang
puff
slang
puff
slang
splash
wetness
splash
wetness
soil
pejorative
splash
wetness
slurp
wetness
munch
wetness
wash
wetness
babble
talking
rattle
talking
gabble
talking
muck things up pejorative
fiddle
pejorative
fiddle
pejorative
plod along
movement
go on about
talking
dangle
quick or strong
movem.
be lanky
quick or strong
movem.
be rickety
quick or strong
movem.
dangle
quick or strong
movem.
147
pingla
ringla
tinkle
coil
kringla
vingla
pretzel
stagger
fjolla
lolla
skrolla
stolla
bulla
lulla
rulla
drulla
krulla
famla
foolish woman
scatter-brained
woman
paint with a
roller
scroll
fool of a woman
bun
reel
roll
blunder
curl
grope
ramla
skramla
svamla
strimla
vimla
tumble
rattle
drivel
strip
swarm
tromla
fumla
rotating
cylindrical sieve
fumble
humla
mumla
rumla
bumble-bee
mumble
be on the spree
drumla
blunder
tumla
tumble
stöppla
give painted
surface a certain
look by striking a
brush against it
drink noisily
sound
reel
quick or strong
movem.
ripple
sound
ripple
sound
rattle
sound
rustle
sound
whisper
talking
squeak
sound
whisper
talking
whistle
sound
wheeze
talking
tramp
walking
rolla
sörpla
haspla
porla
sorla
rassla
prassla
tassla
gnissla
tissla
vissla
rossla
klampa
sound
quick or strong
movem.
winding form
quick or strong
movem.
pejorative
pejorative
round form
round form
pejorative
round form
walking
round
walking
round form
quick or strong
movem.
falling
sound
talking
long thin form
quick or strong
movem.
quick or strong
movement
quick or strong
movem.
sound
talking
quick or strong
movement
quick or strong
movem.
quick or strong
movem.
quick or strong
movement
slampa
trampa
stampa
dimpa
fimpa
limpa
klimpa
skvimpa
fjompa
dumpa
gumpa
jumpa
skumpa
klumpa
plumpa
pumpa
rumpa
sumpa
stumpa
klappa
snappa
rappa
tappa
greppa
steppa
kippa
skippa
trippa
tippa
vippa
hoppa
loppa
glopp
moppa
noppa
snoppa
slut
tramp
stamp
tumble
pejorative
walking
walking
quick or strong
movem.
stub
short-wide form
loaf
short-wide form
get lumpy
short-wide form
splash to and fro quick or strong
movement
be silly
pejorative
dump
slang
jog
quick or strong
movem.
jump from one walking
piece of floating
ice to another
jog
quick or strong
movem.
form lumps
short-wide form
make blots
form
pump
quick or strong
movem.
rump
slang
blow a thing
slang
tiny tot
diminutive
pat
quick or strong
movement
snatch
quick or strong
movem.
strike
quick or strong
movem.
drop
quick or strong
movem.
grip
quick or strong
movem.
tap-dance
quick or strong
movem.
flop about
quick or strong
movem.
skip
quick or strong
movem.
trip along
walking
tip over
quick or strong
movem.
swing up and
quick or strong
down
movem.
jump
quick or strong
movem.
flea
diminutive
sleet
wetness
mop
quick or strong
movem.
pluck
quick or strong
movem.
top and tail
quick or strong
movem.
148
poppa
droppa
proppa
stropp
guppa
knäppa
snäppa
slabbra
bladdra
fladdra
pladdra
sladdra
bluddra
sluddra
bläddra
glindra
tindra
dallra
skallra
pillra
tillra
kvillra
jollra
pjollra
knollra
bullra
mullra
myllra
bjällra
skimra
flimra
glimra
darra
blarra
knarra
snarra
irra
dirra
klirra
pop up
quick or strong
movem.
drip
quick or strong
movem.
cram
quick or strong
movem.
sling
round form
jolt
quick or strong
movem.
flick
quick or strong
movem.
snap one's fingers quick or strong
movem.
chatter
talking
talk nonsense
talking
flutter
quick or strong
movem
babble
talking
chatter
talking
talk nonsense
talking
slur one's words talking
turn over the
quick or strong
pages
movem.
gleam
light
twinkle
light
wobble
quick or strong
movement
rattle
sound
potter at
quick or strong
movem.
trickle
quick or strong
movem.
ripple, twitter
sound
babble
talking
babble
talking
curl
round form
rumble
sound
rumble
sound
swarm
quick or strong
movem.
bell
sound
shimmer
light
flicker
quick or strong
movem., light
gleam
light
tremble
quick or strong
movem.
talk nonsense
talking
creak
sound
burr
talking
wander about
quick or strong
movem.
tremble
quick or strong
movem.
jingle
sound
knirra
pirra
stirra
virra
kvirra
svirra
skorra
morra
knorra
burra
hurra
kurra
plurra
murra
snurra
surra
tjattra
klattra
smattra
knattra
snattra
skvattra
glittra
splittra
fnittra
knittra
kvittra
klottra
plottra
knottra
huttra
kuttra
muttra
puttra
hafsa
sjafsa
tjafsa
lafsa
klafsa
slafsa
creak
tingle
stare
wander about
sound
bodily feeling
gaze
quick or strong
movem.
make a fuss
talking
whirl
quick or strong
movem.
burr
sound
growl
talking
grouse
talking
ruffle up
quick or strong
movem.
hurrah
talking
rumble
sound
fall into the water quick or strong
movement
growl
talking
spin
quick or strong
movem.
hum
sound
jabber
talking
be awkward
pejorative
clatter
sound
rattle
sound
quack
sound
quack
sound
glitter
quick or strong
movement
splinter
quick or strong
movement
giggle
talking
sound high
sound
pitched and
iterated
chirp
sound
scrawl
quick or strong
movem.
potter about
pejorative
get gooserough surface
pimples
structure
shiver
quick or strong
movement
coo
sound
mutter
talking
chug
sound
scamp a thing
pej. quick or
strong movement
shuffle
quick or strong
movement
talk drivel
pej., talking
shuffle
pej., walking
squelch
sound, wetness,
walking
slop
sound, pejorative
149
nafsa
snafsa
rafsa
krafsa
tafsa
lufsa
glufsa
plufsa
rufsa
tufsa
gläfsa
räfsa
jamsa
flamsa
slamsa
ramsa
tramsa
remsa
slimsa
plumsa
mumsa
grumsa
dalta
halta
palta
skralta
skvalta
bulta
rulta
tulta
stulta
bylta
stylta
gasta
hasta
kasta
rista
snap
quick or strong
movem.
snap
quick or strong
movem.
rummage
quick or strong
movem.
scratch
quick or strong
movem.
fiddle about with quick or strong
a thing
movem.
lumber
walking
gobble down
pejorative
plop
quick or strong
movem.
ruffle
quick or strong
movem.
tousle
quick or strong
movem.
yelp
sound
rake
quick or strong
movem.
talk nonsense
talking, pej.
fool about
pejorative
rag
slackness, long
thin form
string
long (thin) form
talk rubbish
talking, pej.
strip
long thin form
rag
long thin form
plop
quick or strong
movem.
munch
quick or strong
movem.
grumble
talking
coddle
pejorative
limp
walking
muffle up
quick or strong
movem.
be rickety
quick or strong
movem.
ripple
wetness, quick or
strong movem.
beat
beat
waddle
walking
toddle about
walking
toddle
walking
muffle up
quick or strong
movem
walk stiff-legged walking
yell
talking
hasten
quick or strong
movem.
throw
quick or strong
movem.
cut
quick or strong
movem.
brista
hosta
pusta
frusta
hysta
burst
cough
pant
snort
throw
destruction
talking
talking
talking
quick or strong
movem.
nysta
knysta
krysta
wind
quick or strong
movem.
breathing a word talking
bear down
talking
5.2. Summary of the analysis of semantic features
for final clusters
The most common semantic feature of the final clusters is 'quick or
strong movement', which is present in 15 final clusters. Table 5.3
compresses all the features and final clusters of table 5.2. The table can
also be compared with table 5.1, where instead the semantic features for
each final cluster are shown. The semantic features are shown, in
descending order, in table 5.3.
Table 5.3 The semantic features of roots from Svensk Baklängesordbok.
Listed are also the clusters corresponding to each feature and the total
frequencies of clusters.
Semantic feature
quick or strong movement
Frequency of
final clusters
85
talking
37
sound
34
pejorative
20
slang
walking
wetness
long thin form
round form
light
short-wide form
19
15
9
5
7
5
4
6 Double
Final clusters6
ffa, N la, pla, spla,
mpa, mla, ppa, dra,
lra, rra, tra, fsa, msa,
lta, sta
bla, fla, mla, sla, bra,
lra, rra, msa, dra,
tra, sta, ska
tS a, mla, rpla, rla,
sla, lra, rra, tra, fsa
fla, lla, mpa, tra, fsa,
msa
ffa, mpa
lla, ampa, fsa, lta
ska
msa
lla
indra, imra
mpa
consonant grapheme stands for a phonologically long consonant.
150
In table 5.4 the ranking of table 5.3 is compared with diagram 4.5, which
shows the most frequent meanings for i n i t i a l consonant clusters.
Table 5.4 The most frequent semantic features for initial and final
clusters.
rank
1
initial clusters
pejorative
2
3
4
sound
long thin form
quick or strong
movement
wetness
talking
light
diminutive
round form
walking
destruction
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
final clusters
quick or strong
movement
talking
sound
pejorative
slang
walking
wetness
long thin form
round form
light
short-wide form
The semantic features in bold type are those nine that are among the
eleven most common features for both groups. 'Sound' is ranked second
for initial clusters and third for final clusters. 'Quick or strong
movement' is ranked first for final clusters and fourth for initial clusters.
'Pejorative' is ranked fourth for final clusters but first for initial clusters.
The semantic features of the six most frequent final clusters are among
the semantic features of the ten most frequent initial clusters. In other
words, many of the most common semantic features are the same for
initial clusters and final clusters. However, 'pejorative' is not as common
in final clusters as in initial.
Some clusters can occur both initially and finally (before a), namely sk,
bl, fl, spl, sl, br, dr, tr and st. Four of these can have the same
semantic feature. These are bl (talking), fl (pejorative), sl (talking), tr
(quick or strong movement, sound, talking, pejorative). However, there
are no conventional words that both begin and end with these
combinations.
151
5.3 Properties of consonant clusters of Nusvensk
Frekvensordbok
Using the root analysis with paraphrases of Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 4
(NFO4), an analysis of final clusters that resembles the analysis of initial
clusters was made, i.e. sound symbolic roots were excerpted from a
larger set of roots with the aid of key words (cf. Appendix 1). NFO4 is a
frequency dictionary of Swedish morphemes, and the material consists of
1 million words from newspaper articles. List 4.3 of NFO4 contains the
roots ordered in reverse. The reason not to analyze only the NFO4
material is that there are many more words in Svensk Baklängesordbok.
The roots from the NFO4 material are chosen in the following way: they
shall contain at least one root ending of a cluster, if this root belongs to
one of the semantic categories listed in chapter 4.
The most common clusters, absolutely and percentally, are shown in
diagrams 5.1 and 5.2, and in the following diagrams (5.3 to 5.11) the
semantic profiles of some of the most common clusters are shown.
The first diagram (5.1) shows how the clusters rank when the total
number of sound symbolic roots are counted. -Nk and -sk are the clusters
with the largest number of sound symbolic roots. Thereafter follow - fs, nd and -tr. -Nk, -sk, -fs and -tr are described in detail below. Diagram
5.1 corresponds to diagram 4.1 of initial clusters.
The next diagram (5.2) shows the clusters that have the highest degree of
sound symbolic roots. The first five have a percentage of 100% because
there is only one – sound symbolic – root, for every cluster. These are
not studied in further detail. The following ones with quite a high
percentage are -fs, -dr and -lr, followed by -ml and - Nl, These are
described in detail below. Also -bl is described. Diagram 5.2 corresponds
to diagram 4.4 of initial clusters.
152
ltn
spl
mj
rS
j f
mt
lb
lt
ps
rl
Sk
r j
ld
lm
ls
r v
nt
ms
ns
sl
Nl
bl
lk
dr
lr
ml
st
mp
t r
nd
fs
sk
Nk
7 In
this and the following diagrams "N" stands for [N] and "S" stands for [S].
Diagram 5.17 More and less sound symbolic final clusters. Number of motivated root morphemes per cluster.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
ksn
rv
ps
mt
rl
ls
lm
lk
mp
sk
ms
bl
sl
Nk
tr
Sk
ml
Nl
dr
lr
ksn
fs
ltn
spl
mj
rS
jf
lb
Diagram 5.2 Percent of motivated root morphemes per cluster, for final consonant clusters.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
nt
st
lt
ns
r j
nd
ld
The following diagrams, 5.3 to 5.11 show the semantic profiles for
different final clusters. These diagrams can be compared with the
diagrams 4.16 – 4.23, which show the semantic profiles for different
initial clusters. Diagram 5.3 shows the semantic profile of -fs.
60
50
40
%
30
20
10
0
pejorative
sound
quickness
Diagram 5.3 Semantic features of the cluster -fs. Percentages concern the
number of semantic features in proportion to all roots of the cluster.
Diagram 5.3 shows the semantic features of the consonant cluster -fs. The
words (representing root morphemes) of the dominating features are
shown in table 5.5. The absolute frequencies (not the percentages) of the
semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 5.5 The sound symbolic morphemes of the -fs cluster, the semantic
features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'pejorative': hafs (slovenliness), tjafs
(drivel), slafs (sloppiness), rafs (trash),
krafs (knick-knacks), lufsa (shamble),
kalufs (forelock), rufsa (ruffle),
tufsa (tousle), bjäfs (gewgaws)
'sound': klafs (squelch), gläfs (yelp)
'quickness': nafs (snap), rafs (trash)
155
10
2
2
10
9
8
7
6
5
%
4
3
2
1
wetness
slang
beat
sound
quick or strong
movement
long thin f o r m
0
Diagram 5.4 The semantic profile of -Nk . Percentages concern the
number of semantic features in proportion to all roots of the cluster.
Diagram 5.4 shows the semantic features of the consonant cluster -Nk. In
table 5.6. the words (representing root morphemes) of the dominating
features are shown. The absolute frequencies (not the percentages) of the
semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 5.6 The sound symbolic morphemes of the -Nk cluster, the semantic
features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'long thin form': bank (bar), dank
(thin candle), hank (a band), planka
(plank), rank (tall and slender), spinkig
(slender), rynka (furrow)
'quick or strong movement': flink
(quick), slink (slip), vink (wave)
156
7
3
'sound': banka (knock), dunk (thumping),
stånka (puff and blow)
'beat': banka (knock), dunka (thump)
'slang': pank (broke), grunka (gadget)
'wetness': klunk (gulp), stänk (splash)
3
2
2
2
The following diagram (5.5) shows the semantic profile of -sk.
8
7
6
5
4
%
3
2
1
0
wetness
pejorative
beat
sound
Diagram 5.5 The semantic profile of -sk. Percentages concern the number
of semantic features in proportion to all roots of the cluster.
Diagram 5.5 shows the semantic features of the consonant cluster -sk. The
words (representing root morphemes) of the dominating features are
shown in table 5.7. The absolute frequencies (not the percentages) of the
semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 5.7 The sound symbolic morphemes of the -sk cluster, the semantic
features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'wetness': blask (slops), plask (splash),
slask (slush), smaska (guzzle), vaska
(wash), loska (spit), mäsk (mash),
träsk (swamp)
157
8
'pejorative': sjask (cad), fnask
(prostitute), snaska (be messy), fnoskig
(dotty), fjäsk (fawning)
'beat': daska (slap), plask (splash), piska (whip)
'sound': pladask (flop), smaska (guzzle)
5
3
2
The following diagram (5.6) shows the semantic profile of -tr.
14
12
10
8
%
6
4
2
0
talking
sound
pejorative
Diagram 5.6 The semantic profile of -tr. Percentages concern the number
of semantic features in proportion to all roots of the cluster.
The diagram 5.6 shows the semantic features of the consonant cluster -tr.
In table 5.8 the words (representing root morphemes) of the dominating
features can be studied. The absolute frequencies (not the percentages) of
the semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 5.8 The sound symbolic morphemes of the -tr cluster, the semantic
features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'talking': tjattra (jabber), snattra (quack),
fnittra (giggle), muttra (mutter),
yttra (utter)
158
5
'sound': smattra (clatter), knattra (rattle),
kvittra (chirp), puttra (simmer)
'pejorative': tjattra (jabber), plottra (fritter)
4
2
The following diagram (5.7) shows the semantic profile of -Nl.
40
35
30
25
%
20
15
10
5
0
quick or strong movement
Diagram 5.7 The semantic profile of - Nl . The percentage is of the
semantic feature, for all roots of the cluster.
Diagram 5.7 shows the semantic feature of the consonant cluster - Nl. The
words (representing root morphemes) of the only feature is shown in
table 5.9. The absolute frequency (not the percentage) of the semantic
feature is shown to the right.
159
Table 5.9 The sound symbolic morphemes of the - Nl cluster, the semantic
feature involved, and its absolute frequency.
'quick or strong movement': dingla
(dangle), singla (dance), vingla (wobble),
jonglera (juggle)
4
The following diagram (5.8) shows the semantic profile of -bl . The
percentage is of the semantic feature for all roots of the cluster.
25
20
15
%
10
5
0
talking
Diagram 5.8 The semantic profile of -bl . The percentage is of semantic
features for all roots of the cluster.
Diagram 5.8 shows the semantic feature of the consonant cluster -bl. The
words (representing root morphemes) of the only feature is shown in
table 5.10. The absolute frequency (not the percentage) of the semantic
feature is shown to the right.
Table 5.10 The sound symbolic morphemes of the -bl cluster, the
semantic features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'talking': babbla (babble), rabbla (rattle),
käbbla (bicker), jubla (shout with joy)
160
4
The following diagram (5.9) shows the semantic profile of -dr.
25
20
15
%
10
5
0
quick or
strong
movement
talking
pejorative
Diagram 5.9 The semantic profile of -dr . Percentages concern the
number of semantic features in proportion to all roots of the cluster.
This diagram shows the semantic features of the consonant cluster -dr. In
table 5.11 the words (representing root morphemes) of the dominating
features are shown. The absolute frequencies (not the percentages) of the
semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 5.11 The sound symbolic morphemes of the -dr cluster, the
semantic features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'quick or strong movement': fladdra (flutter),
bläddra (turn over the pages)
'talking': pladdra (babble), sluddra (slur)
'pejorative': pladdra (babble), sluddra (slur)
2
2
2
The next diagram (5.10) shows the semantic profile of -lr . Percentages
are of semantic features for all roots of the cluster.
161
45
40
35
30
25
%
20
15
10
5
0
sound
quick or
strong
movement
Diagram 5.10 The semantic profile of -lr . Percentages are of semantic
features for all roots of the cluster.
Diagram 5.10 shows the semantic features of the consonant cluster -lr.
The words (representing root morphemes) of the dominating features are
shown in table 5.12. The absolute frequencies (not the percentages) of the
semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 5.12 The sound symbolic morphemes of the -lr cluster, the
semantic features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'sound': skallra (rattle), bullra (make a noise),
mullra (rumble), bjällra (jingle)
'quick or strong movement': dallra (tremble),
myllra (swarm)
The last diagram (5.11) shows the semantic profile of -ml.
162
4
2
20
18
16
14
12
%
10
8
6
4
2
0
quick or
strong
movement
movement
sound
Diagram 5.11 The semantic profile of -ml . Percentages concern the
number of semantic features in proportion to all roots of the cluster.
Diagram 5.11 shows the semantic features of the consonant cluster -ml.
The words (representing root morphemes) of the dominating features are
shown in table 5.13. The absolute frequencies (not the percentages) of the
semantic features are shown to the right.
Table 5.13 The sound symbolic morphemes of the -ml cluster, the
semantic features involved, and their absolute frequencies.
'quick or strong movement': vimla (swarm),
fumla (fumble), tumla (tumble)
'movement': famla (grope), ramla (fall down)
'sound': skramla (rattle), humla (bumble-bee)
163
3
2
2
5.3.1 Summary of the analysis of properties o f
different final clusters
As well as for the initial clusters, the meaning profiles for the sound
symbolic final clusters vary. Different clusters are connected with
different meanings. Also the final clusters have different semantic
profiles. Some final clusters have several semantic features, others have
only one.
Of these absolutely and percentally most common clusters (-Nk, -sk,-fs, nd, -tr, -dr, -lr, -ml, - Nl), 5 out of 9 end with a liquid and are mainly
connected with 'quick or strong movement', 'talking', 'sound', and
'pejorative'. -sk is dominated by 'wetness' and -fs is clearly 'pejorative'
5.4. Vowels
As mentioned earlier, vowels may also have sound symbolic meaning. To
delimit the analysis of vowels, the contrastive effect of different vowels
was studied.
5.4.1 Vowel pairs and triplets
In order to investigate the semantic effect of different vowels, word pairs
were searched for. However, there are not so many cases of word pairs
with contrasting vowels. Those that were found contrast the vowels [i]-[a],
[i]-[a]-[u], [i]-[o], [i]-[P]. Most of them imitate sound (8 out of 19). The
examples (taken from Svensk Baklängesordbok) are: klibba-klabba
(adhesion8 ), slibba-slabba (wetness), slidder-sladder9 (talking, pejorative),
klifsa-klafsa (wetness, sound), klitsch-klatsch (sound), ritsch-ratsch
(sound), snick-snack (talking), ringla-rangla (movement), tissla-tassla
(talking), rispa-raspa (rough surface structure), dirr and darr
(movement), knirra-knarra (sound), knistra-knastra (sound), knittraknattra (sound), slimsa-slamsa (form) snipp-snapp-snorum (in nonsense
verse), dripp-dropp (sound), tick-tock (sound), klimp-klump (form).
From the definitions in Svensk Ordbok it is not evident that there is a
meaning distinction (size or pitch) between [i] and [a] except for some
cases, but clearly [i] never stands for anything large or low-pitched. (For
an investigation of English reduplicatives see Thun, 1963.)
8 Shown within parenthesis is the semantic feature for both words in the pair. Some
words share two semantic features.
9 In fact, many of these pairs occur as semi-lexicalized compounds, e.g. in poetry and
verse.
164
However, there are a number of words found in Svensk Baklängesordbok
which show that root morphemes with endings containing [i] often have
the meanings 'smallness', 'quickness' or 'high pitch', while [P] has the
meanings of darker sounds or bigger movements – while [a] seems quite
neutral. Comparing the endings [inka] and [Pnka] in table 5.14, there is, in
blinka (twinkle) and lunka (jog along), a contrast in small, quick
movement versus big, slow movement. In klinka (tinkle) and dunka
(thump) there is a contrast between high pitched and low pitched sound.
Table 5.14 The vowels i, P, a before the ending -Nka
kinka
linka
blinka
klinka
slinka
spinka
vinka
dunka
pjunka
lunka
klunka
runka
banka
klanka
planka
slanka
ranka
vanka
svanka
whine
limp
twinkle
tinkle
slip
split (wood)
wave (hand)
thump
coddle
jog along
gulp down
shake
bang
grouse
plank
make slim
creeper
saunter
be sway-backed
The vowels with the ending -lra can also be compared. Most of the -lra
words imitate sounds or movements where i clearly stands for smallness
or high pitch and [P] for low pitch, e.g. tillra (trickle) and mullra
(rumble).
165
Table 5.15 The vowels a, i, O, P before the ending -lra.
dallra
skallra
pillra
tillra
kvillra
jollra
pjollra
knollra
bullra
mullra
quiver
rattle
potter at
trickle
ripple, twitter
prattle
twaddle
frizz
rumble
rumble
The i and [P] vowels in words ending with -ttra show similar tendencies,
cf. e.g. kvittra (twitter) and muttra (mutter).
Table 5.16 The vowels a, i, O, P before the ending -tra.
tjattra
klattra
smattra
knattra
snattra
skvattra
glittra
splittra
fnittra
knittra
kvittra
knottra
huttra
kuttra
muttra
puttra
chatter
make a fuss
clatter
rattle
quack
quack
glitter
splinter
giggle
sound high
pitched and
iterated
twitter
get goosepimples
shiver
coo
mutter
chug
5.4.2 Vowels in light/gaze-words
The following list contains most light or gaze root morphemes:
blek (pale), blick (gaze), bliga (stare), blind (blind), blinka (blink), blixt
(lightning), blossa (flare), blända (blind), blänga (glare), blänka (shine),
flimra (flicker), glana (stare), glans (luster), glatt (glossy), glimma
(gleam), glimra (gleam), glimta (gleam), glindra (gleam), glisa (shine),
glittra (glitter), glo (stare), gloria (halo), glutta (take a glance), glåmig
166
(pale), glänsa (shine), glöd (glow), gnista (spark), gnistra (sparkle), tindra
(twinkle), skimra (shimmer).
The stressed vowels of these 30 root morphemes are in 16 cases i, in 1
case e, in 4 cases E, in 1 case Ø, in 3 cases a (2 [a] and 1 [A: ]), in 2 cases o,
in 2 cases u, and in 1 case [P]. The dominating vowel is clearly i.
Furthermore, 24 of the vowels are front vowels; only 5 are back vowels
and 1 is central. It seems thus that the feature 'light' is connected with
front vowels (high F2).
5.4.3 The vowel [P]
Since there seemed to be a tendency for words with [P] (a short, medial,
half closed, rounded vowel) to have a pejorative meaning (see table 5.2),
this vowel was studied more closely. In the whole material (Appendix 1)
the number of pejorative features is 163. Of these features 33 belong to
roots with [P], i.e. 20%. The number of non-pejorative features is 789 and
70 of these belong to roots with a [P], i.e. 8%. A Chi square test showed
that there is a significant correlation between 'pejorative' and [P] (p. <
0.0001).
5.4.4 Summary of vowels
From the examples in this material it seems quite clear that stressed
vowels are connected with the semantic dimensions 'size' and 'high-low
pitch' (which are connected through the frequency code); i tends to have
the meanings 'smallness', 'quickness', 'high pitch', while [P] seems to have
the meanings of 'low pitch' and 'largeness'. a seems quite neutral. The
special study of [P] showed that this sound is over-represented among
roots with the pejorative feature.
5.5. Comparisons of final clusters of roots from
different sources
5.5.1 NFO4 and Sigurd (1965)
Since the question of which final combinations should be taken into
account is somewhat open, a comparison is made between NFO4 and
Sigurd (1965). Table 5.17 shows the final clusters which are found in the
two different sources. The comparison with Sigurd (1965) is included to
remind the reader that the final clusters of NFO4 are not exactly the same
167
as those of other analyses and to show which clusters are found in both
sources.
168
nsk
psk
Sk
bl
mbl
ndl
fl
gl
Nl
rjl
gl
jl
kl
N kl
rkl
ml
pl
mpl
spl
rl
Ns l
jsl
nsl
psl
sl
ntl
stl
vl
rvl
ksl
gm
hm
km
lm
rm
sm
stm
tm
Nn
jn
kn
ln
mn
pn
rn
sn
tn
ltn
ksn
jp
lp
mp
rp
Table 5.17 The final clusters of
NFO4, those of NFO4 that are
sound symbolic, and, as a
comparison, the primary final
clusters according to Sigurd
(1965).
Clusters
for all
reverse
order
sorted
roots of
NFO4
lb
mb
rb
gd
jd
ld
md
nd
vd
jf
lf
mf
rf
sf
rg
dg
rj
ntg
nS
rk
nS
rS
tS
dj
lj
mj
nj
rj
lC
tj
vj
jk
lk
mk
Nk
rk
sk
lsk
msk
Clusters
for sound
symbolic
roots
from
NFO4
Primary
clusters
according
to Sigurd
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
169
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
sp
br
rbr
dr
ldr
ndr
dr
rdr
fr
gr
kr
Nkr
lr
mr
nr
pr
tr
rtr
str
kstr
vr
lvr
bs
ds
fs
js
ks
ls
ms
ns
Ns
ps
mps
rps
ts
ft
rft
kt
Nt
jt
kt
Nkt
rkt
lt
mt
nt
pt
st
fst
Nst
jst
kst
mst
+
nst
St
kv
lv
rv
nts
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
170
+
+
+
+
+
Table 5.17 shows the following: There are, in the NFO-material, 151
different endings of roots. Of these, 33 are used systematically for sound
symbolism.
The rightmost column shows which of these clusters are primary final
combinations according to Sigurd (1965). Quite a few root final
combinations in NFO4 are not the same as Sigurd’s word final
combinations. Also some of Sigurd’s final combinations do not occur in
the NFO-material: tsk, pst, lft, lst, Nd, Nt.
5.5.2 The most frequent final clusters in NFO4
The following tables (5.18 and 5.19) show which final clusters are the
most frequent for different semantic features, both absolutely and
percentally. They show that fs is the most sound symbolic final cluster
(pejorative) both in absolute numbers and percentally.
Table 5.18 The most frequent final clusters in absolute numbers. Their
semantic features are shown to the right.
Cluster
fs
sk
Nk
sk
tr
st
lk
bl
Nl
Cluster
frequency
10
8
7
5
5
5
4
4
4
sl
lr
tr
ms
4
4
4
4
171
Semantic feature
pejorative
wetness
long thin form
pejorative
talking
sound
long thin form
talking
quick or strong
movement
sound
sound
sound
pejorative
Table 5.19 The most frequent final clusters in percent10 of the total
number of roots for clusters. Their semantic features are shown to the
right.
Cluster
fs
lr
Nl
%
59
44
40
Sk
sl
ms
dr
29
27
27
25
dr
dr
bl
lr
25
25
24
22
Semantic feature
pejorative
sound
quick or strong
movement
attitude
sound
pejorative
quick or strong
movement
talking
pejorative
talking
quick or strong
movement
The accumulated frequencies of table 5.18 show that the most common
semantic feature is 'pejorative' with 19 roots (distributed over 3 clusters)
followed by 'sound' with 17 roots (distributed over 4 clusters), 'long thin
form' with 11 roots distributed over 2 clusters, and 'talking' with 9 roots
distributed over 2 clusters.
5.5.3 Discussion of final clusters in Svensk
Baklängesordbok and in Nusvensk Frekvensordbok
As pointed out in the beginning of this chapter, it is not self-evident which
are the final clusters in Swedish. The semifinal clusters (before a) of
Svensk Baklängesordbok (the Reverse Order Dictionary), the final
clusters of Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 4, and of Sigurd (1965) are
partially overlapping sets. For practical reasons, percentages are
calculated only on Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 4.
Likewise, the roots of the two dictionaries also constitute partially
overlapping sets. The lemmas (from which roots were extracted) of
Svensk Baklängesordbok come from the Wordlist of the Swedish
Academy (Svenska Akademiens ordlista över svenska språket, 1974) and
10 The
following clusters have a 100%-frequency because they have only one root, which
is sound symbolic: lb (round form), jf (long thin form), rS (walking), mj (bodily
feeling), spl (quick or strong movement), ltn (destruction) and ksn (mental feeling).
172
from the same newspaper material as the material of Nusvensk
Frekvensordbok. Consequently Svensk Baklängesordbok contains more
roots. The similarities and the differences in the analyses of the two
dictionaries are as follows (cf. also tables 5.4 and 5.24).
The most common semantic features
The most common semantic features are, in order:
Svensk Baklängesordbok: 'quick or strong movement', 'talking', 'sound',
'pejorative', 'slang', 'walking', 'wetness', 'long thin form', 'round form',
'light', 'short-wide form'.
Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 4: 'pejorative', 'sound', 'long thin form',
'talking', 'wetness', 'quick or strong movement'.
For both dictionaries the following features are the same: 'quick or strong
movement', 'talking', 'sound', 'pejorative', 'wetness' and 'long thin form'.
(These six features are also the six most common features of initial
clusters, however in a different order, cf. table 5.4).
The most common final consonant clusters (including all sound symbolic
semantic features) are, in descending order (tables 5.20 and 5.21).
Table 5.20 The most common final consonant clusters (for all sound
symbolic semantic features) in Svensk Baklängesordbok. Cf. table 5.2.
mp
fs
tr
ml
st
lr
lt
ms
Nl
sl
dr
sk
fl
tS
20
18
18
13
12
12
11
10
8
7
7
6
4
3
173
In Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 4 the most common final consonant clusters,
including all sound symbolic semantic features, are (cf. diagram 5.1):
Table 5.21 The most common final consonant clusters (for all sound
symbolic semantic features) in Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 4.
Nk
sk
fs
nd
tr
mp
ml
st
dr
lr
19
18
14
12
11
8
7
7
6
6
As can be seen in the two lists above, many, but not all, of the most
common clusters are the same, namely mp, fs, tr, ml, st, lr, dr, and sk,
in slightly different order.
The following clusters used sound symbolically are found in Svensk
Baklängesordbok but not in Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 4: fl, t S, gl, pl,
rpl and br.
The differences between the two dictionaries seem to be greater for the
consonant clusters than for the semantic features, but the most common
consonant clusters are to a great extent the same. Studying not only the
most common clusters, there are more sound symbolic clusters in Svensk
Baklängesordbok. This might be due to the fact, described above, that
Svensk Baklängesordbok is based on a larger selection.
5.6 Combinations of initial and final consonant
clusters
Initial and final clusters can combine to create meaning, e.g. 'wetness' as
in blaska, plaska, slaska, smaska, snaska. The final combinaton -ska is
connected with 'wetness' and the initial clusters bl-, pl-, sl-, sm- and sncan also stand for 'wetness' (among other things).
174
The final clusters are combined in different ways with the initial clusters,
apart from with single consonants. There are four groups:
1.
initial cluster + no final cluster (e.g. skval11 )
2.
no initial cluster + final cluster (e.g. babbla)
3 a. initial cluster + final cluster with the same meaning
(e.g. blaska, wetness+wetness)
3 b. initial cluster + final cluster with a different meaning
(e.g. drumla, pejorative + quick or strong movement)
The analysis of group 1 is based on the analysis of chapter 4 (of Svensk
Ordbok). The following analysis of groups 2 and 3 is based on the final
clusters of Svensk Baklängesordbok. As the analysis in 5.5. shows, the
most common semantic features are the same for both initial clusters and
final clusters.
5.6.1 Initial cluster + no final cluster
In order to study sound symbolism of the initial clusters isolated from
final clusters (cf. discussion in 4.1), the roots with a sound symbolic
initial cluster n o t ending in a final cluster were studied more closely.
Table 5.22 shows the frequencies of semantic features when roots ending
with clusters or geminates are not taken into account. The table shows the
semantic features, the frequencies and root examples, and the clusters are
ranked in frequency order. The words are extracted from Appendix 1.
The roots of Table 5.22 are a subset of the roots in Appendix 1. Table
5.22 thus only shows the roots which do not end with a final cluster or
geminate, whereas Appendix 1 contains roots both with and without final
clusters or geminates.
11 It
is possible that there is sound symbolism also in single consonants, initially as well
as finally. For example, [S] could have the semantic feature 'separation' as in skiva,
skilja, skinna. Also, singular sounds with special characteristics could attract sound
symbolic meanings, e.g. [r] is a sound which is different from other sounds and [C] has
low frequency in Swedish. This question is not investigated in this thesis, but is left for
further research.
175
Table 5.22 Combinations of initial cluster + no final cluster. The
recurring semantic features of initial clusters in frequency order. Listed
to the right are the roots.
features
pejorative
freq.
45
long thin form
36
talking
23
sound
21
the words
bliga, drasut, dröse, fjäsa,
flina, glop, glupa, glåpord,
gnat, gneta, gnidare, gräma,
gräslig, klåpa, knal, knasig,
kneg, kneken, knöl, knös,
krake, kreta, kruserlig,
kräk, mjäkig, pjåkig, pryl,
skral, slas, slasa, slok, slyna,
slö, slösa, sniken, snyta,
snål, snöd, snöpa, spoling,
strul, tradig, trasa, vräkig,
vrövel
skåra, slana, släde, snabel,
sno, snok, snöre, spene,
speta, spik, spila, spira,
spole, spö, spjut, spjäla
spröt, stake, stav, stig,
stilett, stör, streamer,
strigel, stril, stripa, strut,
strå, stråk, stråle, stråt,
truta, tryne, tråd, tråg, trål
gnat, gnola, gny, gnöla,
gråta, gräla, klaga, knota,
kverulans, prat, pruta,
skri, skrodera, skryta,
skrål, skräna, skröna,
smäda, snäsa, svada, svära,
vrål, vrövel
braka, brus, bräka, bröl,
fnysa, frasa, fräsa, gnoding,
knaka, knot, krakel, kras,
kråka, kvida, kväda, kväka,
skval, snusa, snyta, stön,
stril
176
quick or strong
movement
18
wetness
15
thin form
13
smooth surface
structure
11
destruction
11
light
10
gaze
10
diminutive
8
walking
8
round form
7
winding form
7
bad mood
6
hollow form
5
form
bodily feeling
soft consistency
fine grain
rough surface structure
separation
falling
putting together
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
flanera, fluga, flyga, flyta,
flåsa, flöda, frusa, gnida,
gno, skaka, slira, slita,
spruta, stöt, svepa, sväva,
vrida, vräka
blod, blöt, klena, kleta,
kram, kräm, skval, smet,
snor, snuva, spad, spola,
sputum, spruta, stril
flaga, flak, flarn, flisa, fnasig,
krakmandel, krokett,
krusta, krustad, spade,
spat, spatel, spån
glací, glaciär, glas, glatt,
glida, glissando, gnida, gno,
slipa, slät, spegel
bryta, bråte, bräck,
bränning, frat, fräta, kvarn,
skrot, skräp, trasa, vrak
blek, bläs, glacé, glisa,
gloria, glåmig, glöd, prål,
spat, spraka
bliga, glana, glaukom, glo,
glosögd, glosa, plira, snegla,
spana, speja
gli, glipa, knåp, krabat,
smula, små, späd, vret
knata, krypa, kräla, snava,
strosa, ströva, trava, träda
blåsa, knop, knota, knödel,
knöl, kruka, skopa
krok, krokan, krusa, kråma,
kräla, krök, spiral
gräla, trulig, tråkig, träta,
vrede, vresig
grav, grop, gryt, gräva,
gröpa
glipa, glob, plös, pryl
kval, kvav, kväva, svida
mjuk, plym, plymå, plysa
mjäla, mjöl, stöv, strö
fryna, krås, skråma, sträv
spagat, split, spreta, sprida
dråsa, drälla, drösa
knipa, knut, knyta
177
hardness
slackness
quickness
stiffness
slang
beat
mental feeling
jocular
fine grain
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
skal, skare, skava
slak, slana, sloka
snar, sno, snudig
styv, strak, stram
plit, snut
slag, slå
snopen, tråna
spe, spjuver
stöv, strö
In order to make a general comparison with the earlier results of chapter
4 concerning the semantic features found in the analysis of initial
consonant clusters, part of the results of diagram 4.5 are presented as a
table below (table 5.24).
The 11 most frequent semantic features for the combination initial cluster
+ no final cluster (and no geminate consonant) are shown in table 5.23.
This ranking can be compared with diagram 4.5, which shows the
frequencies of all the semantic features, both with and without final
clusters.
Table 5.23 The 11 most frequent
Table 5.24 The 11 most frequent
semantic features for the combination semantic features of diagram 4.5
initial cluster + no final cluster.
showing initial clusters irrespective of
final cluster.
pejorative
long thin form
talking
sound
45
36
23
21
163
107
97
67
18
pejorative
sound
long thin form
quick or strong
movement
wetness
quick or strong
movement
wetness
thin form
smooth surface
structure
destruction
light
gaze
15
13
11
talking
light
diminutive
55
32
31
11
10
10
round form
way of walking
destruction
23
22
21
178
63
Table 5.23 shows the 11 most frequent semantic features of table 5.22
(initial clusters + no final clusters or geminates), whereas table 5.24
shows the 11 most frequent features of diagram 4.5 (or Appendix 1),
which contains roots with initial clusters either with or without final
clusters or geminates.
Naturally, there are fewer words in the table showing initial cluster + no
final cluster. In both tables, i.e. for both initial cluster + no final cluster
and initial cluster + final cluster, 'pejorative' is the most frequent feature.
The features 'long thin form', 'sound', 'quick or strong movement',
'wetness' and 'talking' are among the six most frequent features in both
tables. In other words the same six features are among the six most
frequent features in both cases, only in partially different order. This
means that the semantic features are the same, and also approximately as
frequent, irrespective of whether one analyzes roots with only initial
consonant clusters or roots with both initial and final consonant clusters.
This result strengthens one outcome of the analysis of chapter 4: the
analysis of semantic features of initial clusters actually showed the
semantic features of the initial consonant clusters and not of the final
clusters.
5.6.2 No initial cluster + final cluster
Table 5.25 shows the combinations of no initial cluster + final cluster, in
frequency order.
179
Table 5.25 Combinations of no initial cluster + final cluster. The
recurring semantic features of final clusters in frequency order. Listed to
the right are the roots.
semantic feature
freq. rank
the words
in 5.22
quick or strong
51
5
rutscha, puffa, dangla,
movement
rangla, dingla, ringla,
vingla, famla, vimla,
fumla, rumla, tumla,
haspla, dimpa, gumpa,
pumpa, rappa, tappa,
kippa, tippa, vippa, hoppa,
moppa, poppa, guppa,
dallra, pillra, tillra,
myllra, darra, irra,
dirra, virra, burra,
huttra, hafsa, sjafsa,
nafsa, rafsa, tafsa, rufsa,
tufsa, räfsa, mumsa,
palta, bylta, hasta, kasta,
rista, hysta, nysta
talking
18
3
babbla, rabbla, gaffla,
mumla, tassla, tissla,
rossla, jollra, morra,
hurra, murra, tjattra,
muttra, jamsa, gasta,
hosta, pusta, tjafsa
sound
14
4
ratscha, pingla, humla,
sörpla, porla, sorla, rassla,
vissla, bullra, mullra,
kurra, surra, kuttra,
puttra
slang
12
haffa, fiffa, piffa, roffa,
buffa, luffa, ruffa, tuffa,
töffa, dumpa, rumpa,
sumpa
pejorative
9
1
taffla, fiffla, ruffla, lolla,
hafsa, tjafsa, lafsa, jamsa,
dalta
walking
7
13
lulla, jumpa, lafsa, lufsa,
halta, rulta, tulta
round form
3
14
rolla, bulla, rulla
short-wide form
2
fimpa, limpa
light
2
10
tindra, skimra
long thin form
2
2
ramsa, remsa
180
The ranking of the most frequent words can be compared with the
ranking of table 5.22. This comparison shows that 'pejorative' is not as
frequently coded in the final clusters as in the initial clusters.
On the other hand, 'slang' (mainly coded in -ffa), 'walking' and 'quick or
strong movement' are more frequent in words with only final clusters,
compared with words with only initial clusters. This might be due to the
verbal nature of the clusters ending in a vowel. In the same way as table
5.23 is compared with table 5.24, table 5.25 can be compared with table
5.26, which contains all the roots (and not just the ones without initial
clusters) taken from table 5.2.
Table 5.26 All roots from table 5.2, ordered by semantic features, in
frequency order.
semantic feature
quick or strong
movement
talking
sound
freq. the words
85
rutscha, knuffa, puffa, dangla, rangla, skrangla,
dingla, ringla, vingla, famla, vimla, tromla,
fumla, rumla, drumla, tumla, stöppla, haspla,
rumla, dimpa, skvimpa, gumpa, skumpa, pumpa,
klappa, snappa, rappa, tappa, greppa, steppa,
kippa, skippa, tippa, vippa, hoppa, moppa,
noppa, snoppa, poppa, droppa, proppa, guppa,
knäppa, snäppa, fladdra, bläddra, dallra, pillra,
tillra, myllra, flimra, darra, irra, dirra, virra,
svirra, burra, plurra, snurra, glittra, splittra,
klottra, huttra, hafsa, sjafsa, nafsa, snafsa, rafsa,
krafsa, tafsa, plufsa, rufsa, tufsa, räfsa, plumsa,
mumsa, palta, skralta, skvalta, bylta, hasta, kasta,
rista, hysta, nysta
37
babbla, rabbla, gaffla, traggla, svamla, mumla,
tassla, tissla, rossla, slabbra, bladdra, pladdra,
sladdra, bluddra, sluddra, jollra, pjollra, blarra,
snarra, kvirra, morra, knorra, hurra, murra,
tjattra, fnittra, muttra, tjafsa, jamsa, grumsa,
tramsa, gasta, hosta, pusta, frusta, knysta, krysta
34
klatscha, ratscha, pingla, skramla, humla, sörpla,
porla, sorla, rassla, prassla, gnissla, vissla,
kvillra, skallra, bullra, mullra, bjällra, knarra,
klirra, knirra, skorra, kurra, surra, smattra,
knattra, snattra, skvattra, knittra, kvittra, kuttra,
puttra, gläfsa, klafsa, slafsa
181
slang
19
pejorative
19
walking
15
wetness
9
round form
long thin form
light
short-wide form
diminutive
falling
bodily feeling
gaze
rough surface structure
beat
destruction
slackness
movement
winding form
form
7
5
5
4
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
haffa, blaffa, klaffa, fiffa, sniffa, piffa, skoffa,
roffa, buffa, skuffa, luffa, fluffa, ruffa, gruffa,
tuffa, töffa, dumpa, rumpa, sumpa
taffla, fiffla, ruffla, fjolla, lolla, stolla, slampa,
fjompa, klattra, plottra, lafsa, glufsa, flamsa,
dalta, slafsa, hafsa, tjafsa, tramsa, jamsa
lulla, drulla, klampa, trampa, stampa, jumpa,
trippa, lufsa, halta, rulta, tulta, stulta, stylta,
klafsa, lafsa
blaska, plaska, slaska, smaska, snaska, vaska,
glopp, klafsa, skvalta
rolla, skrolla, bulla, krulla, stropp, rulla, knollra
strimla, slamsa, ramsa, remsa, slimsa
glindra, tindra, skimra, glimra, flimra
fimpa, limpa, klimpa, klumpa
stumpa, loppa
ramla
pirra
stirra
knottra
bulta
brista
slimsa
knaggla
kringla
plumpa
The analysis shows that the six most frequent features are the same and
that they are so in exactly the same order. This result strengthens the
analysis of final clusters in table 5.25.
5.6.3 Initial cluster + final cluster
The tables 5.27 and 5.28 show combinations of final clusters and initial
clusters. The examples are extracted from table 5.2. Table 5.27 shows
combinations where the semantic features are the same initially and
finally, and table 5.28 shows combinations where the features are
different initially and finally. The following conclusions can be drawn:
1. Fifty words have the same semantic feature initially and finally,
whereas 34 words have different features. However, of these 34 words, 8
have initial and final features that are similar to each other: 'sound' +
'talking' and 'winding form' + 'round form'. It is more common, then,
182
for semantic features to be the same, initially and finally, than to be
different.
2. The semantic features of a root can be the same initially and finally for
each root with double features12 . These are the following, listed in order
of frequency. The meanings of initial clusters come from the analysis in
Appendix 1, and the meanings of final clusters come from the analysis in
table 5.2.
Table 5.27 Semantic features (with absolute frequencies of the roots) that
are the same initially and finally in one and the same root.
doubling
features
sound
freq.
18
talking
9
pejorative
9
wetness
quick or strong
movement
light
walking
short-wide form
long thin form
4
3
the words representing
root morphemes
klatscha, skramla,
prassla, gnissla, skallra,
kvillra, bjällra, knarra,
klirra, knirra, skorra,
smattra, knattra, snattra,
knittra, kvittra, klafsa, gläfsa
svamla, slabbra, bladdra,
sladdra, bluddra, sluddra,
blarra, tramsa, grumsa
fjolla, stolla, slampa, fjompa,
plottra, slafsa, glufsa, flamsa,
tramsa
blaska, plaska, slaska, snaska
tromla, skippa, fladdra
3
2
2
1
glindra, flimra, glimra
trampa, stulta
klimpa, klumpa
slamsa
Table 5.28 shows which different semantic features are combined initially
and finally. A word representing a root morpheme may occur in two
places if it contains two features initially or two features finally, e.g.
plumsa: pl- means both 'sound' and 'wetness' in this root morpheme.
12 There
are 50 words but 51 features, as can be seen in the table, because one word
(tramsa) contains two features initially and two features finally.
183
Table 5.28 Semantic features that are different initially and finally in one and
the same root.
final:
initial:
semantic
feature of
final
cluster:
slang
quick or wetness
strong
movement
walking
klappa
steppa
knäppa
snäppa
krafsa
plumsa
klampa
stampa
round
form
talking
semantic
feature of
in itia l
cluster:
sound
pejorative
blaffa
beat
smaska
drumla
klottra
plufsa
snarra
kvirra
knorra
fnittra
frusta
knysta
krysta
pjollra
drulla
knuffa
bad mood
gruffa
talking
destruction
gruffa
skrangla
splittra
skralta
winding
form
iterative
snurra
quickness
falling
wetness
snappa
droppa
droppa
plurra
plumsa
skvalta
light
diminutive
glittra
splittra
krulla
stampa
The following conclusions can be drawn from table 5.28.
1. The semantic feature which is most often combined with other features
is final 'quick or strong movement' – but this could partly be an effect of
the choice to study the semifinal "a- endings".
2. The most common feature combinations are:
184
'sound' + 'talking' (7 words)
'sound' + 'quick or strong movement' (6 words)
'wetness' + 'quick or strong movement' (4 words)
In the combination 'sound' + 'talking' the two features are closely related
and they strengthen each other.
3. 'Sound' is the most common initial feature in these combinations.
4. The otherwise common semantic features 'sound' and 'pejorative' do not
have final position in these combinations. 'Talking' and 'walking' are much
more common in final position than in initial.
5.6.4 Summary of combinations
The general results of the study of combinations of initial and final
clusters are the following: Sometimes the initial cluster carries the sound
symbolic meaning because the word ends in a single consonant (Group 1).
The most common semantic feature of Group 1 is 'pejorative', which is
also the case for all the sound symbolic roots in Appendix 1. The same six
features are among the six most frequent ones in both groups and this
indicates that the analysis of chapter 4 showed what it was intended to
show: the meaning of initial clusters.
When there are both initial and final consonant clusters in a root, these
can combine by having the same meaning (Group 3a), e.g. bl- and -aska
('wetness') – cf. table 5.27. Alternatively, different meanings can combine
in a word (Group 3b), e.g. glittra – cf. table 5.28. The most common
combinations are those in which the meaning is the same initially and
finally. The most common meaning for group 3a is 'sound' + 'sound',
followed by 'talking' + 'talking' and 'pejorative' + 'pejorative'. The most
common meaning combinations for Group 3b is 'sound' + 'talking',
followed by 'sound' + 'quick or strong movement'.
Finally, sometimes only the final cluster (or geminate) carries the sound
symbolic meaning, because the word begins with a single consonant
(Group 2). The most common meaning is 'quick or strong movement'
followed by 'talking' and 'sound'.
185
5.7 Summary and discussion of initial and final
clusters, and vowels
This and the preceding chapter have shown that certain semantic features
are connected with certain initial and final consonant clusters and with
vowels – in different constellations and to different extents. A study of
combinations of initial and final clusters shows that the sound symbolic
meaning of a root morpheme can also be dependent on the combinations
of phonemes of the whole word, e.g. sl- 'wetness' + a + -sk(a) 'wetness'
(=slaska (splatter)). (However, both 'slisk' and 'slusk' have the feature
'pejorative' and not 'wetness' because of the semantic profile of sl-, cf.
4.4.1).
Partly the same semantic features are used in both initial and final
clusters, while the vowels sometimes add a dimension of 'size' (smalllittle, high pitch-low pitch). The 'light/gaze' words, where the vowel is
almost always a front vowel, could be included in the 'size' group, since
'light' can be seen as synaesthetically connected with high pitch. The
vowels, when they are used sound symbolically, thus often seem to have
other semantic features than the consonant clusters do, and they add a
special meaning to roots – which otherwise get their sound symbolic
meaning from initial and/or final clusters – e.g. by showing if a sound is
high pitched or low pitched, or if a movement is quick or slow.
For typically sound-symbolic (where all or almost all root morphemes are
sound symbolic) or high frequent initial clusters, vowels, and final
clusters, the meaning of a word, especially of a neologism, should be
predictable.
A nonsense expression like pjaffla : pj- ('pejorative') + a + -fla
('pejorative') ought to be interpreted as a pejorative word. A neologism
like brullra : br- ('sound') + P ('low pitch') + -lra ('sound' or 'quick or
strong movement') ought to be interpreted as imitating sound (a low
pitched one) while a nonsense expression like flillra: fl- ('quick or strong
movement') + i ('smallness', 'quickness' or 'high pitch') + -lra ('sound'
186
or 'quick or strong movement') ought to be interpreted as something
having to do with quick movement13 .
Looking at real words, there can be a combination effect like in skrangla
(skranglig-rickety) "which has an unsteady construction, or has become
unsteady because of long usage". This definition goes well with the
phonesthemes skr- 'destruction' and -ngla 'quick or strong movement'.
Another example is klatscha (crack): kl- 'sound' and -tscha [tS a] 'sound'.
A more unconventional word klitscha (which is not in the dictionary)
would stand for a more high pitched sound14 . For real words there can
always be an effect of conventionalization which makes them less
predictable.
Conventionalization can always take over, at least partly, either in the
arbitrary direction or in choosing phonesthemic meanings. The
phonestheme level is an underlying level which can be activated by
different types of context.
The next chapter will present contrastive studies of some semantic fields
of sound symbolism. In chapter 7 final clusters, as well as initial clusters,
will be discussed again in connection with neologisms.
13 In
the experiments with nonsense words in chapter 6 only the effect of the initial
clusters were tested. In further research, however, the intention is to also test the
combined effects.
14 Two roommates were asked about the meaning of this expression. They answered that
it was not a real word, and then one of them gave a possible meaning 'the sound of a
bicycle spoke that breaks'. The other person said it meant 'the sound that comes when
you drive on a thin layer of ice'. Both these definitions have to do with a high pitched
sound.
187
6 Some contrastive studies in sound symbolism
6.1 Introduction
The phenomena of onomatopoeia and other sound symbolism have been
described in part for different languages. Some earlier contrastive
findings are described in the overview of 1.10.4.
The aim of this chapter is to study some of the semantic features and
consonant clusters discussed above in order to analyze what differences
and similarities there are between some languages.
In the first section I will present a contrastive lexical study made on some
selected meanings in a Thesaurus. The languages compared are Swedish
and English. I will then present a contrastive study of some expressive
interjections, commands and greetings and a study of words for animal
sounds. Furthermore I will present a contrastive experiment of
interpretation of Swedish sound symbolic words.
6.2 The Thesaurus study
6.2.1 Method
In this experiment informants chose the best words for 'stupidity',
'roughness' and 'smoothness' in English and Swedish out of a Thesaurus.
From the Swedish Thesaurus (Bring, 1930) a couple of meanings were
chosen, namely: 'dumhuvud' (501), 'oförstånd' (499), and 'glatthet' (255),
'skrovlighet' (256). In the English Roget´s Thesaurus (1977) the
following meanings were chosen: 'fool' (501), 'imbecility' (499),
'insanity' (503), 'smoothness' (255), and 'roughness' (256)
Lists of all words under these headings were then inspected by native
informants, three for the Swedish material and three for the English
material. The informants were given the instruction "to mark words, the
expressive forms of which are felt to be especially adequate for their
content".1
1
Since I am not an active speaker of English and since I have deepened my intuitions of
Swedish phonesthemes from the analysis of chapter 4, I used subjects for this task.
189
6.2.2 Results
6.2.2.1 Words for 'stupidity' in English
Since English does not have the clusters typically pejorative for Swedish:
fj-, fn-, pj-, there could be no similarities between Swedish and English
here. (Cf. below and diagram 4.6.)
There were 4 words where all three English subjects agreed:
nincompoop, blockhead, dunce and dull.
Two of the three subjects agreed on 9 words: simpleton, dolt, booby, oaf,
clod, silly, muddleheaded, addleheaded, fool.
Isolated contributions from either of the subjects were: tomfool, ass,
noodle, gawk, mooncalf, dotard, driveler, old fogy, Simple Simon, goose,
lout, idiot, dotage, idiocy, fatuity, giddiness, drivel, dote, stultify, bovine,
feebleminded, obtuse, stolid, fatuous, driveling, bewildered, maudlin,
stupidity, foolishness, rashness, brainless, childlike, vacant.
Many of these words are not what we would normally think of as sound
symbolic. Nevertheless there seems to be a slight tendency for the
preferred ones to contain a long [u] or an [a] and perhaps [d] initially or
medially. The value of the initial consonant clusters is difficult to judge
from this material.
6.2.2.2 Words for 'stupidity' in Swedish
All three Swedish subjects agreed on the following words: pjosker2 ,
pjasker, fjoller, fnasker, fjanter, flep, flepig, pjåk, fjolleri, fjant, pjoller,
pjosk, fjollig, fjoskig, fjantig, pjoskig, pjollrig, pjåkig, pjaskig.
The frequencies of the initial consonant clusters are the following:
pj- : 9 words
fj- : 7 words
fl- : 2 words
fn-: 1 word
2
The Swedish words listed under the different categories of the Thesaurus are not
translated since the Thesaurus heading, e.g. "stupidity" shows the semantic category.
What is interesting is not the exact meaning of all these words, but which sounds are the
most frequent for each Thesaurus heading.
190
Except for fl- the result above mirrors the results of the percentally most
frequent clusters well (diagram 4.6).
Two of the subjects agreed on the following words:
mähä, tafser, tossa, tafsig, fjoskighet, fjanta, fjollas, pjollra, pjoska, pjåka,
pjask.
The most common clusters here are:
pj-: 4 words
fj-: 3 words
There is a clear preference for the fj- and pj- clusters among the Swedish
informants.
Isolated contributions were: våp, tåp, jöns, fån, sjasker, drummel, tosing,
stolle, drönig, tåpig, -snut, pund-, mes, schajas, flack, flärdfull, larvig,
korkad, tafs, sjask, jolt, fåna, jolta, drumlig, slapp, slö, våpig, fånig,
sjaskig, taskig, tölpig, showing an additional preference for the vowels
[o:], [O] and [a]. The consonant cluster which is the most common is dr(3 roots). The cluster dr- is pejorative according to the analysis in
chapter 4.
6.2.2.3 Words for 'surface structure' in English
For the categories of 'roughness' and 'smoothness' there where two
English subjects who made an assessment.
'Roughness'
Both subjects agreed on the following words: crest, ruffle, crumple,
rumple, rugged, jagged, gnarly, scraggly, scraggy, craggy, cragged,
prickly, bristly, bushy.
The clusters cr- and scr- and the consonant r are favored.
Isolated contributions were: asperity, corrugation, shag, cross-grained,
hirsute, shaggy, nappy, thatch, whiskers, feather, rough, crinkle. Among
these words there are two instances of cr- and five instances of single r.
'Smoothness'
Both subjects agreed on the words sleek and glossy.
191
Isolated contributions were: plane, level, polish, velvety, glassy, gloss,
roller, roll, oily, silken, silky.
The preferred consonant is l.
6.2.2.4 Words for 'surface structure' in Swedish
'Roughness'
All three subjects agreed on the following words: knotter and knottrig.
Two out of three agreed on the following: knotighet, knut, knyla, knotig,
knagglig, klippig, knollrig, krullig, krusig, stripig, skrapa, skrynka,
skrynkla, knottra, skrovlig, skrynkig, skrynklig3
These words show a preference for r and for the clusters kn- and skrand kr-. The kr- and skr- words both have the semantic feature 'rough
surface structure' (in chapter 4) but kn- words are analyzed as 'round
form'. The cluster with the highest number of root morphemes with the
feature 'rough surface' structure (in the lexical analysis) is skr-.
Isolated contributions were: raggighet, knöl, kornighet, rufsighet, burr,
stripa, ludenhet, lurv, tovig, purrighet, ludd, borst, ragg, lugg, rugg,
stubb, test, ull, kvist, ris, tistel, tova, tuva, kvast, visp, buckla, kugge,
krusning, rysch, frans, dun, plysch, schagg, sträv, fårad, uddig, tandad,
taggig, törnig, risig, buskig, tuvig, lummig, sträv, tofsig, noppig.
These contributions, from singular subjects, show a preference for the
vowel [P].
'Smoothness'
All three subjects agreed on glätta, glatta, glanska and glansa showing
preference for gl-.
Two out of three agreed on: glättning, glans, slipprighet, slirning,
glidning, blanka, glasera, glida, slira, glatt, glansig, glansk and slipprig.
3
All words excerpted by the subjects were counted, and as a consequence the list also
contains words that represent the same root.
192
The recurring clusters are gl-, sl-, bl-, which all contain the liquid l.
These are, except for sl-, related to 'light', but as was shown in 4.6 there
is an indexical relation between 'light', 'reflecting surface' and 'movement
on reflecting surface'. Slipprig and slira were analyzed as 'quick or
strong' movement in the lexical analysis, (while slipa, slät, slätt were
analyzed as 'smooth surface structure'). Sl- is also to a high degree
connected with 'wetness'.
Isolated contributions were: glänsa, glänsande, blank, glas, smörjning,
smörja, smärgel, kristall, siden, silke, sammet, lackera, polera, slipa,
kana, stryka, mangla, valsa, oljig, smidig, mjäll.
Also in these words the l is very frequent, however not part of an initial
cluster.
6.2.3 Conclusions of the Thesaurus study
There was greater agreement between Swedish and English among the
preferred sounds for 'surface structure', both 'roughness' (r, skr) and
'smoothness' (sl, gl) than for 'pejorative'. An explanation to this might
be that 'surface structure' is closer to a potentially common phenomenon,
namely sound imitation, since stroking different surfaces gives different
sound effects.
Sometimes the isolated contributions perhaps mirror the fact that the task
at hand for the test subjects can be difficult to keep in mind or that the
language feeling sometimes runs amock among words with similar
meanings. Suddenly all words can feel motivated. Nevertheless, this
method is a possible way of comparing different languages, through the
intuitions of informants. A problem with using the Thesaurus is that the
word corpus listed is very heterogeneous. Examples of this are several
words (however not chosen by the Swedish subjects) under the category
'roughness': ojämnhet (unevenness), knävelborr (big and bushy
moustache), brottyta (fracture), kartnagel (deformed nail), vårta (wart)
and tuppkam (cock's crest).
For cross linguistic comparisons the Thesaurus method used above is an
alternative to free production within different semantic fields, (for those
languages that have a Thesaurus). Naturally, native informants have to be
used.
193
6.3 Some interjections in different languages
Expressive interjections is one of the sound symbolic types described in
2.4. The relation between expression and meaning is mainly indexical; the
expression is caused by a bodily or mental reaction. It is an interesting
task to analyze how similar the expressive interjections are in different
languages (the question of universal traits of the expression). It is also
interesting to see, for the expressive interjections of Swedish, to what
extent the expressive interjections are unsystematical, i. e. not relatable to
phonesthemes.
Expressive interjections, commands and greetings (cf. Ideforss, 1928,
categorization) are exemplified mostly with a fragment of the examples in
Ideforss. These were translated into 8 different languages with the help of
informants. The languages are Icelandic, English, Polish, Hungarian,
Finnish, Ososo, Malagasi and Slovenian. The results are presented in
Appendix 2 and grouped according to type of interjection. The expressive
interjections, commands, and greetings are listed in table 6.2 and in
Appendix 2. They are written in normal spelling in table 6.2.
In some cases it was difficult to ask subjects to translate word for word.
The semantic contents of the intended interjection instead had to be
described (within the semantic categories of table 6.2), after which the
informant gave the closest correspondence in his own language. The way
the semantic contents was described to the informant depended on his or
her competence in Swedish or English, e.g. "Give me a word or
expression for when you want to be depreciatory" or "Give me a word or
expression for when you think somebody or something is bad or ugly,
etc".
The semantic features used in earlier chapters, which correspond to the
features of these interjections, are shown in table 6.1.
194
Table 6.1 The semantic features
correspondences in earlier chapters.
Features of
interjections
pejorative
positive
surprise
song
other bodily or mental
feeling
commands
greetings
of
interjections
and
their
Corresponding features
of earlier chapters
pejorative
attitude
mental feeling
talking
bodily feeling or mental
feeling
talking
talking
6.3.1 Swedish expressive interjections
In table 6.2, a sample of the Swedish expressive interjections is presented.
Table 6.2 Examples (in ordinary spelling, mostly from Ideforss, 1928) of
Swedish expressive interjections, commands and greetings.
EXPRESSIVE
pejorative
bu
usch
hu
"t" [|]
blä
ha
håhå(jaja)
tvi
öh
ä
äh
bah
asch
äsch
isch
uh
urrk
fy
tss
positive
tjo(hej)
ah
oh
åh
haha(ha)
hihi(hi)
mm
surprise
oj
oh
åh
ä
åhå
song
lala(la)
trala(la)
other bodily or
mental feeling
aha
aj
brr
hm
åhej(åhå)
puh
pust
ojojoj
vojvoj
håhå(jaja)
atjo
195
mums
namnam
iih
grr
COMMANDS
to animals
schas
ptroo
"t" [|]
"p" [Ö]
to persons
jaja
aja(baja)
sch
vyss
lull lull
pst
bu
GREETINGS
ohoj
hoho
6.3.2
Discussion
of
Swedish
interjections, commands and greetings
expressive
Some short comments are made here on the phonetic/phonological
structure of the interjections in table 6.2 in order to relate them to the
analyses in chapters 2, 4 and 5. They often consist of only a vowel,
sometimes extra long, or of only a consonant, often extra long. They can
begin with a vowel or a consonant. The more open vowels are preferred,
especially [A] and [a] but also [O]. The most common phonemes are j and
h.
Of the initial clusters, bl-, tv-, ts, tr-, br, gr-, ptr and pst, that occur
among these interjections, bl-, tr- and gr- conform with the analysis in
chapter 4, i.e. bl- can be 'pejorative', tr- can be 'talking' and gr- can be
'bad mood'. The clusters ts, ptr and pst are unconventional. The final
clusters are very few: -rk, -st and -ms. None of these conform to the
meanings of final clusters of chapter 5.
This result is in accordance with the analysis presented in 2.4, which said
that the sound side of expressive interjections are realized more
unsystematically, i.e. they are not (partly) built up by phonesthemes as
sound symbolic roots are. But, as can be seen, the borders are not
absolute between expressive interjections and sound symbolic
phonesthemes. Three interjections – blä (bl- 'pejorative'), tralala (tr'talking') and grr (gr- 'bad mood') – conform with the phonesthemic
analysis.
Typical for the interjections are the special sounds or sound combinations
that occur, e.g. click sounds and non-standard phonotactic combinations,
e.g. [ptro:], [ts:], [pst] and [hm], and isolated consonants like [S]. CVstructure and reduplicated CV-structure are also common, as well as the
lengthening of vowels or consonants. Consonant frames with a shift of
vowel, e.g. asch, äsch, usch, isch also occur. Here it is quite obvious that
the vowel quality imparts different meanings (cf. 5.4). The same goes for
ah, äh, eh, i(h), ö(h). Prosody is probably important but has not been
studied here. None of the phonological or phonetic characteristics is
clearly connected with a certain semantic feature.
196
To summarize, few of the interjections have (conventional) initial
consonant clusters. Of those 5 conventional clusters that occur, 3 conform
with the analysis of chapter 4: bl- (pejorative), tr- (talking) and gr- (bad
mood). The final clusters of interjections are very few, and none of them
conforms with the analysis in chapter 5.
6.3.3 Phonological and phonetic similarities and
dissimilarities between interjections of different
languages
One interesting question now is: Are there phonological and phonetic
similarities between the interjections of different languages? Expressive
terms, which mirror bodily and mental states, could be similar in
different languages, with a larger or smaller language specific
superstructure. (cf. Abelin and Allwood, 1984). An analysis of my
material (presented in Appendix 2) gives the following result:
Each semantic category shows its sound pattern tendencies for the
different languages. These tendencies are enhanced by big differences
between the categories. The pejorative interjections, for example, often
contain an [u:] or an [O], the positive interjections an [i] or an [a], surprise
often an [O] or an [a]. 'Pain' (cf. Swedish aj) has an [a] and a [j] or a
diphtongized open vowel. 'Sneeze' (cf. Swedish atjo4 ) has a voiceless
fricative or an affricate in all the languages being studied, and the
interjection for go away (to an animal) (cf. Swedish schas) has a voiceless
fricative. 'Good taste' has a nasal in these 8 languages, and 'scaring
somebody' has a voiced stop (mostly b) in all these languages except for
two.
When counting all instances of vowels and consonants in the interjections
in Appendix 2 (excluding the Swedish ones, since they are greater in
number) the following tendencies are found, shown in table 6.3. (Which
languages contributed to which sounds can be seen in Appendix 2 and
table 6.3). Many of the categories of table 6.3 are more specific than
those in table 6.2, depending on what answers the informants gave, cf.
4
Different ways of conventionalizing this physical outburst (which of course can vary for
different individuals and from time to time) is, in Swedish, mirrored in older spellings of
this word: atschi, atsji, aptschäh, apschohoj, aaah-tschah-katsch katsch, kaa-kah, tschah,
tjas, hlutt, schtschi, tjihitt, tjihihitt, tjitjisit (Ideforss, 1928, p. 25).
197
Appendix 2. The categories 'song' and 'greetings' were not elicited from
the informants.
Table 6.3 The most common vowels and consonants for different
categories of interjections. The languages are Icelandic, English, Polish,
Hungarian, Finnish, Ososo, Malagasi and Slovenian.
pejorative
positive
vowels
O (9), u (9), i (5)
O:
Icelandic: 2
English: 1
Polish: 2
Hungarian: 1
Ososo: 2
Slovenian: 1
u:
Icelandic: 1
English: 3
Hungarian: 3
Finnish: 2
i:
Hungarian: 1
Finnish: 2
Slovenian: 2
i (6), a (5)
i:
Icelandic: 2
English: 2
Finnish: 2
a:
Icelandic: 1
English: 2
Finnish: 1
Ososo: 1
198
consonants
j (10), f (6), h (6)
j:
Icelandic: 3
English: 1
Polish: 1
Hungarian: 4
Ososo: 1
f:
English: 2
Hungarian: 1
Ososo: 1
Slovenian: 2
h:
Finnish: 5
Ososo: 1
(3), p (3)
j:
Icelandic: 1
English: 1
Finnish: 1
p:
Icelandic: 1
English: 1
Finnish: 1
j
surprise
pain
freezing
thoughtfulness
j (3), h (3)
O (7), a (4)
O:
English: 1
Polish: 1
Ososo: 1
Slovenian: 4
a:
Icelandic: 1
English: 1
Ososo: 1
Malagasi: 1
a (9), u (6)
a:
Icelandic: 2
English: 2
Hungarian: 2
Finnish: 1
Malagasi: 1
u:
Icelandic: 2
Hungarian: 2
Ososo: 2
O (2)
O:
Polish: 2
j:
Hungarian: 1
Ososo: 1
Slovenian: 1
h:
Icelandic: 1
Hungarian: 1
Slovenian: 1
j (7)
j:
Icelandic: 1
Hungarian: 4
Finnish: 1
Malagasi: 1
b (3), r (3)
b:
English: 1
Polish: 1
Hungarian: 1
r:
English: 1
Polish: 1
Hungarian: 1
h (5), m (6)
h:
Icelandic: 1
English: 2
Polish: 1
Finnish: 1
m:
Icelandic: 2
English: 2
Polish: 1
Finnish: 1
-
199
exhaustion
sudden insight
sneeze
good taste
commands to
animals
u (4)
h (4)
u:
English: 1
Polish: 1
Finnish: 2
a (10)
a:
English: 4
Hungarian: 2
Ososo: 2
Slovenian: 2
i (8), a (6)
i:
English: 1
Polish: 1
Hungarian: 1
Ososo: 3
Slovenian: 2
a:
Icelandic: 1
English: 1
Polish: 1
Hungarian: 1
Slovenian: 2
a (6)
a:
Icelandic: 3
English: 1
Polish: 2
h:
Hungarian: 1
Finnish: 3
h (7)
h:
English: 4
Hungarian: 1
Ososo: 1
Slovenian: 1
t (6), C (5)
t:
Icelandic: 1
English: 1
Hungarian: 1
Ososo: 1
Slovenian: 2
C:
Icelandic: 1
Polish: 1
Ososo: 1
Slovenian: 2
m (11), n (7)
m:
Icelandic: 4
English: 1
Polish: 2
Finnish: 1
Slovenian: 3
n:
Icelandic: 3
Polish: 2
Slovenian: 2
S (7)
S:
Icelandic: 1
English: 1
Polish: 1
Hungarian: 2
Finnish: 1
Malagasi: 1
i (3), u (5)
i:
Icelandic: 2
Hungarian: 1
u:
Icelandic: 2
English: 1
Ososo: 1
Malagasi: 1
200
mild warning to
children
-
be quiet
-
scaring somebody
u (5)
s (3)
s:
Icelandic: 3
S (4), t (3)
S:
English: 1
Hungarian: 1
Finnish: 1
Malagasi: 1
t :
Polish: 1
Hungarian: 2
b (6)
b:
Icelandic: 1
English: 1
Polish: 2
Hungarian: 1
Finnish: 1
u:
English: 1
Polish: 2
Hungarian: 2
The table shows that there are many vowels and consonants that are
similar in the languages Icelandic, English, Polish, Hungarian, Finnish,
Ososo, Malagasi and Slovenian for the categories 'pejorative', 'pain',
'sneeze', 'good taste', 'be quiet', 'thoughtfulness' respectively. These
vowels and consonants of all the functions of table 6.3 are (approximately)
[i], [a], [O], [u] and [p], [b], [m], [f], [t], [s], [n], [r], [j], [C], [S], [h]. Most of
these consonants are labial or dental. There are no consonants produced
behind the hard palate, except for [h]. The vowels are few and mostly [i],
[u], and [a].
It also seems that a certain sound (or sound combination) is preferred in a
certain language and is used for a variety of meanings. The Polish
informant, for example, prefers the sound combinations [ux], [Ox] and [O],
while the Hungarian informant prefers [jOj], [jaj], [juj].
There are also different degrees of conventionalization in the language,
both depending on speakers and on the situation (wild and tame forms in
Rhodes' (1995) terminology). Thus, in Swedish there are both expiration
201
and the interjection uh for 'tiredness', and an imitation of the horse's
neigh or the interjection gnägg.5
6.4 Imitations of animal calls
A subgroup to the onomatopoeic interjections (cf. 2.4) are those that
imitate animal sounds.
sound imitative
Animal call imitative Imitative of physical and bodily reactions
Figure 6.1.
interjections.
Relations between different
types of
Other
onomatopoeic
Many animals have laryngeal and supraglottal organs and cavities similar
to man, but with different resonance properties. Most of them produce
sounds in the same way as humans (cf. Lindblad, 1992). These sounds
seem to be sufficiently similar to allow for imitation in human languages.
6.4.1 Expressions for animal calls in Swedish and
other languages
The human expressions that imitate animal calls are easy to categorize
semantically. (I presume that e.g. a Swedish cat sounds the same as a cat
from geographically distant countries.) Interjections imitating animal calls
have been translated, with the help of informants, into 16 different
languages: Icelandic, English, Polish, Hungarian, Finnish, Ososo,
Malagasi, Korean, Japanese, Chinese, Estonian, Urdu, Persian, Kurdish,
Arabic, and Spanish (see table 6.4).
5There is reason to believe that comic strips have contributed to a conventionalization of
both writing and speech (via writing).
202
Table 6.4.a Interjections imitating 7 animal calls, from 16 different languages.
mouse
cat
Korean
tSikTSik
Japanese
tSiju:
Chinese
tSitSitSi
Finnish
pyppyp
jaON
njaON
nija:
nijaN
mimio
mijao
miau
Estonian
pi:p
miau
Urdu
tSitSi
miaow
Persian
-
miau
Kurdish
DikDikDik miau
Arabic
-
miau
Polish
pipi
miau
be:
me:
me:
ba:
me:
English
skwi:k
i:k
miau
ba:
Swedish
pi:p pi:p miau
Spanish
-
Icelandic
pi:p pi:p miau
Hungarian
-
miau
Ososo
-
miau
miau
goat/
sheep
dog
pig
horse
cow
mœœ:
mœhœ:
mE:mE:
mUNmUN kulkul
kENkEN
waNwaN bu:bu:
hihi:hiN
Im:E:
hihiN
mo:
mimi:
mimie:
mœ:œ:
w´w´w´ IhIhIh
ahahaha Na:
hauhau
vuhvuh
auxaux
rØhrØh
ihaha:
am:u:
ØhØh
ihaha
mu:
bONbON
–
-
m:
mØk:
mœ:
mE:
bE:
bE:bE:
howhow korokoro hihihi:
daNtSo
wOwwOw –
-
mE:
habhab
–
hEehEe
ma:
bOrabOr
bu:
hauhau
–
hihi
mu:
OiNkOiNk neigh
mu:
bœ:
mœ:
be:be.
bauwau
wOfwOf
japjap
vuv:uv
vufvuf
guau
nØf:nØf:
gnEg:nEg
m¨
OiNkOiNk
-
mu:
mœ:
vufvuf
¯
njihaha
møù
rØf:rØf:
-
mu:
imitation
-
mu:
bœ:œœ
vauvau
mœkmœk
bœœ
bOubOu
Table 6.4.b Interjections imitating another 8 animal calls, from 16 different languag
crow
Korka:kka:k
ean
Japa- ka:ka:
nese
Chin- tSijatSija
ese
Finn- va:kva:k
ish
Eston- ian
Urdu
kajkaj
cuckoo
owl
duck
PUkukpUkuk
kak:o:
PuUN- kwakpuUN
kwak
ho:kho:k ga:ga:
hen
rooster
frog
chicken
kokotœkoko
kokoko
kokjo:
-
-
kokekoko
-
-
kukuku
kIkIkI
-
-
pukupuku ahaha
ka:kak
kuk:u:kuk:u:
kuku
uhu:
kvak-kvak kO:tkotkot kuk:ukva:k
kie:ku
prœ:k
kaka
kukeleku: -
-
kvakva
kokokoko
huhu:
kONkONkON
203
kOk´lONkON
-
-
Pers- VarVar hoho
ian
Kurd- ish
Arabic
Polkrakra kuku
ish
EngkOwkOw kuku:
lish
Swed- krakskuku:
ish
kraks
Spanish
Icelandic
huo:
ba:bu:ba:bu:
hu:hu:
kwakkwak
kwakkwak
waq
uhu:
kwakwa koko
kukuriku
-
-
kwakkl´kkl´k
kwak
kvakkvak kakaka
kOk´dud´ldu:
-
-
kPkElik¨:
kvak:vak: pi:p pi:p
kikiriki:
-
-
huhu:
-
-
-
kr¨k- kr¨k
-
¨hu :
kwakkwak
bra:bra:
-
u:u:
Hung- ka:rka:r arian
Ososo
VodVod
kukulikoko
kOkOkokO qOqOqOqO
-
-
-
-
ququ
qoqoqo
-
-
klPkklPk
-
-
kakaka
kPkElikP -
pi:ppi:p
haphap
kOtkOt
kukuriku
tCiptCip
kuOk
klOkklOk
kukuru:ku
OkOkOrOkO
-
krukkruk tCiatCia
The following conclusions can be drawn from comparisons between
expressions for animal sounds:
1. There is imitation of animal calls in all the languages in the study.
2. No animal call imitation is exactly the same in all languages.
3. Some animal call imitations are similar in the different languages,
while others vary more. For example, the cat's sound is conventionalized
as [miau] in all languages except in Korean where it is [njaON], Japanese
where it is [nijaN ] and Chinese where it can be [mimio] (but also [mijao]).
The expression for the dog's sound, however, varies greatly between the
languages. One possible explanation for this is that the calls of the
different animals differ in complexity so that for the complicated animal
calls, different languages attend to different acoustic characteristics with a
point of departure in the phonology of the language. Another possibility
is that some animals simply have a bigger repertoire of calls.
4. There are mostly similarities between expressions for animal calls on
the level of phonological features. For example, all imitations of the cats
meow include a nasal, and the imitation of the rooster always contains a
204
voiceless plosive, velar or uvular. Sometimes the similarity is in the form
of reduplication. The dog says [vuv:uv ] or [vuf:vuf] in Swedish, the same
in Icelandic, and [vau vau] in Hungarian, so in these languages the initial
consonant is the same. In Ososo the dog says [bOubOu]. The likeness with
the previous examples lies in the initial consonant which is voiced and
labial, and that there is an [u] vowel.
5. Prosody is probably important but not analyzed here.
6. Within each language here, as well as for the interjections, there are
likenesses which can be supposed to depend on, or reflect, the
phonological structure of the language in question. For example, Arabic
has [q] where e.g. Swedish has [k], Swedish has [¨] instead of [u], Korean
and Japanese often have a final [N ].
6.4.2 A test of expressions for animal calls o f
different languages
Sixteen of the expressions for animal calls from different languages were
chosen to test how speakers from other languages would interpret them.
Those chosen were the ones where the sound shape of the expression was
the most deviant in the corpus in tables 6.4.a and 6.4.b, in order to make
the test as difficult as possible. The expressions of animal calls are listed
in table 6.5.
The subjects in this test were 15 people, with the following mother
tongues: Swedish (8 subjects), French (2 subjects), English, Hungarian,
Czech, Slovenian, Ososo. All were tested on the same occasion. They
listened to pronunciations of the words for the animal calls and they saw
them transcribed as in table 6.5. They were told to guess which animals
had gotten their calls conventionalized in this way, and to write down
their answers.
205
Table 6.5 The 16 expressions of animal calls chosen for the interpretation
experiment.
CALL
ANIMAL
LANGUAGE
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
vau vau
mπ́:
njihaha
hap hap
rØf rØf
bra: bra:
kOt kOt
kOkEkO‘ko:
prœ:k
pakUk: pakUk:
njaON
bu:
dog
cow
horse
duck
pig
duck
hen
rooster
duck
cuckoo
cat
cow, pig
13.
14.
15.
16.
kOk´lONkON
tSi tSi
maN maN
hab: hab:
rooster
mouse
dog
dog
Hungarian
Icelandic
Hungarian
Hungarian
Hungarian
Icelandic
Hungarian, Finnish
Japanese
Estonian
Korean
Korean
Arabic, Czech,
Japanese
Urdu
Urdu
Korean
Arabic
6.4.3 Results from a test of expressions of animal
calls in different languages
The results were as listed in table 6.6. Sometimes a subject had written
down more than one answer. All answers have been counted except for
when subjects gave a judgement on a word in his/her first language.
Table 6.6 Assignment of animal calls to animals, by 8 speakers of Swedish
and 7 speakers of other languages: French (2 subjects), English,
Hungarian, Czech, Slovenian, Ososo.
expected answer
8 Swedish
other answer
7 other languages
expected answer other answer
1.dog
8
6
2. cow
8
7
3. horse
5
donkey
jackal
5
1
3
donkey
cat
2
1
4. duck
0
?
frog
4
2
7
5
1
1
1
1
0
5. pig
?
goose
hen
hippopotamus
dog
2
dog
?
3
1
206
6. duck
0
sheep
crow
lion
wolf
?
5
2
1
1
1
1
donkey
raven
crow
sheep
?
1
1
1
1
2
7. hen
2
goose
squirrel
?
1
1
4
4
?
3
8. rooster
8
5
hen
pigeon
1
1
9. duck
0
10. cuckoo
0
11. katt
12. cow, pig
(cow)
turkey
sheep
magpie
?
hen
rooster
?
1
1
1
5
4
1
3
2
frog
?
1
4
1
turkey
hen
rooster
?
2
1
1
2
7
?
1
7
2
sheep
2
5 (cow)
frog
1
owl
?
2
2
?
1
13. rooster
7
hen
1
5
?
2
14. mouse
0
squirrel
great titmouse
small bird
snake
?
1
1
1
1
3
1
bird
sparrow
chicken
?
2
1
1
2
15. dog (chin.)
1
chin. peacock
pekingese dog
1
0
Chin. peacock
?
rabbit
?
1
6
1
5
16. dog
1
duck
?
1
6
1
frog
duck
?
1
1
4
207
6.4.4 Discussion of the test on identifying animal
calls
The animals that were correctly identified by all listeners (who gave an
answer) were: dog (in Hungarian, [vau vau]), cow (in Icelandic, [mπ́:])
and cat (in Korean, [njaON]). The Arabic word for the dog’s bark, [hab:
hab: ] and the Korean [maN maN] were not as accurately identified. The
three instances of the duck's sound (from Hungarian, Icelandic and
Estonian) all gave a variety of answers. Only one animal sound was not
identified by anybody, [hap hap] (Hungarian duck). The animal sounds
that were identified by only 1 person were [bra: bra:] (Icelandic duck),
[pakUk: pakUk:] (Korean cuckoo, however, was interpreted as other
birds), [tSi tSi] (mouse in Urdu, however, interpreted as various small
animals), [maN maN] (Korean dog).
In general it can be said that certain animal calls were more difficult to
identify, others were easier. The words for the duck sounds were difficult
while the word for the cat's meow was easy, in spite of the fact that the
word chosen for a meow for the test was the one that was most deviant.
There was no clear difference between the larger group of Swedish
speakers and speakers of the other languages.
Several times the informants guessed on the correct kind of animal, even
though they did not give exactly the expected answer, e.g. 'bird' (see 6, 8,
10) or 'small animal' (see 14). This means that they identified the size of
the animal in question. Some subjects were more unsure than others. No
subject guessed throughout on certain animals. A few subjects were more
imaginative and more specific.6
6.5
Conclusions of studies of
expressive
interjections and expressions of animal calls
Interjections and expressions of animal calls exist in all the languages in
the study. There are similar sounds and meanings in all the languages, but
there are also categories that seem to be specific to a certain language,
e.g. Icelandic has a special command 'go away' directed to sheep. The
expressions of the interjections are not the same in all the languages, but
on the other hand they are not totally different; for some categories they
6
In question 15 there might be an error; somebody must have whispered "Chinese" aloud.
It is still interesting that several subjects judged "Chinese" to be fitting.
208
are very similar, e.g. 'sneeze', 'good taste' cf. table 6.3. These expressions
have an onomatopoeic basis which can be conventionalized in different
ways in the different languages (the expressive interjections also have an
indexical basis, i.e. a bodily reaction produces a sound, e.g. a sneeze or a
scream, cf. 2.4). The phonological system influences the perception of the
sounds and the choice of an adequate expression for imitation, e.g. [D] in
Icelandic. There are, however, tendencies for the whole material: most of
these consonants are labial or dental. The vowels are few and mostly [i],
[a], [u].
The study of expressions of animal calls shows similar phonological
tendencies (the semantic categories investigated were fixed, as specific
animal calls were asked for): The imitations of the animal calls are not the
same in all the languages, but on the other hand they are not totally
different. Also, some expressions of animal calls are more alike in the
different languages, e.g. Persian cat [miau] and Finnish cat [miau] while
others vary more, e.g. Korean pig [kulkul] and Swedish pig [nØf:n Øf:] cf.
table 6.4. The imitations of animal calls can be conventionalized in
different ways in the different languages, e.g. Swedish has [P] or [¨]
where other languages have [u], for example Swedish [kPkelik¨:] and
Hungarian [kukuriku]. The most common vowels are [i], [a], [u], i.e.,
closed or open vowels.
In the interpretation test of expressions of animal calls (cf. 6.4.2–6.4.4),
some animals were identified by all listeners (dog, cow and cat), some
less correctly identified and one animal was not identified at all (duck,
Hungarian). The interpretation test shows that, given the context of
animal calls, it was quite easy for listeners to interpret animal calls from
languages other than their own.
Prosody, voice quality and gestures are most probably important for both
interjections and imitation of animal calls. These forms for expression
need to be studied further.
209
6.6 Test of cross language interpretation o f
Swedish onomatopoeic and other sound symbolic
words
6.6.1 Method
In order to see how non-Swedish speakers interpret Swedish
onomatopoeic and other sound symbolic expressions, an experiment
(similar to that in 7.1.3) was performed.
The subjects were six persons who did not have Swedish as a first
language, one each from of the languages Arabic, Spanish, German,
Dutch, Ibo and English.
A list of 15 written words was presented and read aloud to each subject.
One of the words was repeated. Three of the words were not real ones
but were instead constructed out of phonesthemes. The subjects were told
to write down their answers in a language of their own choice. The words
are:
fjompig
skvalpa
skrälle
pjaltig (constructed)
vresig
glansig
slabbig
bjaltig (constructed)
blankig (constructed ending)
pladdig (constructed)
trumpen
kladdig
slabbig
fladdrig
grubbel
stripig
The subjects were instructed to try to interpret each word and suggest an
appropriate meaning. What is here called the conventional interpretation
of a constructed word is one where the answer has a semantic feature that
210
can be connected with a certain consonant cluster in accordance with the
analysis of chapter 4. These initial clusters: pj-, bj-, pl- and bl- were
successful in different parts of the test in chapter 7 (especially pj) and
could thus be assumed to represent a Swedish norm.
Subjects who knew some Swedish were told to mark the words that they
knew already. After the test the subjects were free to orally elaborate on
their answers.
6.6.2 Results of interpretation of cross language
Swedish onomatopoeic and other sound symbolic
words
The subjects seldom interpreted the words in the conventional way.
However, nearly all of the answers given belong to semantic features of
the model in 2.6.2 and the semantic features of chapter 4. It thus seems
that certain semantic categories are preferred to be expressed sound
symbolically, but that the expression can vary.
The subjects will first be accounted for one by one:
Arabic speaker: This subject had very little knowledge of Swedish and
knew none of the words. He answered in English. He guessed according to
convention on one word. The meaning suggestions belonged to the
following categories: The ones interpreted in an acceptable way, as
concerns phonesthemes, were:
fjompig - big mouth ('pejorative')
pjaltig - speaks wrong ('pejorative', 'talking')
slabbig - slap him/her on face ('beat')
bjaltig - speaks wrong ('pejorative', 'talking')
trumpen - drum’s sound ('sound')
fladdrig - eruption ('quick or strong movement')
For some of the misinterpreted words (misinterpreted in terms of
phonesthemes), the semantic categories of the given answers were
nevertheless in accordance with the sound symbolic categories of the
model in 2.6.2 (These misinterpreted words are labeled "unconventional
but possible category" in table 6.7).
211
'wetness'
'light'
'quick or strong movement', 'wetness'
'quick or strong movement'
The responses that did not fit into any category of the semantic model (or
were difficult to interpret) are: shut up, close the door, kind of penalty,
intuitive, my country.
Spanish speaker: This subject had a good knowledge of Swedish, both
passively and actively. Her answers were given in Spanish, after which
they were translated. The subject knew 4 of the words and guessed
according to convention, in terms of phonesthemes, on 3. The ones
interpreted in an acceptable way, as concerns phonesthemes, are:
skrälle - chiming ('sound')7
blankig - opaque ('light')8
As for the Arabic speaker, for some of the misinterpreted words (in
terms of phonesthemes), the semantic categories of the given answers
were in accordance with sound symbolic categories of the model in 2.6.2.
'adhesion'
'beat'
'long thin form' (2)
'rough surface structure'
'destruction'
German speaker: This subject had a good passive knowledge of Swedish,
but he did not know any of the words on the list. The answers were given
in English. He guessed according to convention on 3 words. The words
that were given an acceptable interpretation, in terms of phonesthemes,
were:
fjompig - condescending ('pejorative')
vresig - angry ('mental feeling')
glansig - shiny ('light')
7
Skr- does not imitate a chiming sound at all, but in the previous analysis no distinction
has been made between different kinds of sound.
8
This is of course the opposite of 'light'.
212
blankig - shiny ('light')
pladdig - looks like a blot of e.g. yogurt ('wetness')
fladdrig - something which is decomposed, thin ('thin form')
The remaining meaning suggestions can be classified in the following
semantic fields:
'small size'
'rough surface structure' (wrinkled skin of tomato)
'form' (distorted)
'pejorative' (distorted; heavy, fat, uncontrolled; unordered)
'mood' (aggressive - of females)
More difficult to classify in the previously discussed categories are the
answers: "powerful"; "no more energy".
Dutch speaker: This speaker had studied Swedish for a year and was very
fluent. She had lived in Sweden for a very short period. She gave her
answers in Swedish or English. She knew 1 of the words and guessed
according to convention on 1 word. The words that were given a
plausible interpretation, in terms of phonesthemes, were:
skvalpa - call names at someone ('talking', 'pejorative')
skrälle - say something with a lot of sound ('sound', 'talking')
pjaltig - snobbish ('pejorative')
slabbig - unorganized ('pejorative')
trumpen - garbage ('pejorative')
kladdig - to write in an ugly way ('pejorative')
stripig - something with many stripes ('long thin form')
For the misinterpreted words (in terms of phonesthemes), the semantic
categories given were, however, in accordance with the model:
'form'
'mental feeling'
'round form'
'quick or strong movement' (2).
One answer could not be classified according to the model: 'void'.
213
Ibo (and English) speaker: This speaker knew none of the words and did
not guess according to convention in any case. The words that were given
a plausible interpretation (acceptable category), in terms of phonesthemes,
were:
slabbig - lazy ('pejorative')
pladdig - dirty ('pejorative')
trumpen - loud ('sound')
grubbel - grumble ('talking')
The semantic categories given were in accordance with the model
(unconventional but possible category) for some of the misinterpreted
words (in terms of phonesthemes):
'putting together'
'bodily feeling'
Seven of the answers could not be classified according to the model
(unconventional category): deep, slowness, positive, closed, tight, empty,
wide.
English speaker This subject had good knowledge of Swedish, Norwegian
and German and answered in English. She knew 4 of the test words and
guessed according to convention on 2 of the words. The words that were
given an acceptable interpretation, in terms of phonesthemes, were:
skvalpa - to gossip ('talking')
skrälle - to complain, whine ('talking')
vresig - twisting ('quick or strong movement')
fladdrig - flimsy ('thin form')
grubbel - annoying, irritating stuff ('bad mood')
However, the semantic categories given were in accordance with the
model (unconventional but possible category), for some of the
misinterpreted words (in terms of phonesthemes):
'round form'
'adhesion'
'sound'
214
One of the answers could not be classified according to the model
(unconventional category): tricked
6.6.3 Conclusions from the test on cross language
interpretation of Swedish onomatopoeic and sound
symbolic words
The following table, 6.7, shows the numbers of answers with different
degrees of accuracy for each subject.
Table 6.7 Summary of the numbers of answers with different degrees of
accuracy in the cross linguistic word interpretation study.
subject’s
language
known
words
Arabic
Spanish
German
Dutch
Ibo
English
sum
0
4
0
1
0
4
9
guess in
accordance with
convention
1
3
3
1
0
2
10
accept.
category
unconventional but
possible
category
unconven- no
answer
tional
category
6
2
6
7
4
5
30
4
6
5
5
2
3
25
5
0
2
1
7
1
15
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
Few of the words were known to the subjects, not even to those who had
good knowledge of Swedish. There were also quite few correct guesses.
Their performance is better when their answers are classified into
semantic categories which are related to phonesthemes of the initial
clusters (column "acceptable category").
The frequencies of words that were judged according to convention (in
terms of phonesthemes) are shown in table 6.8.
All 15 test words are represented in the results and there is no
great preference for any word or words.
215
Table 6.8 Frequencies of words that were most often successfully
interpreted according to the Swedish norm, by the six speakers.
Test words
fladdrig
skrälle
trumpen
blankig
fjompig
grubbel
pjaltig
pladdig
skvalpa
slabbig
vresig
bjaltig
glansig
kladdig
stripig
Number of speakers
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
Table 6.9 shows which semantic categories were used most often, when
the subjects guessed in an unconventional way (i.e. there is no possibility,
according to the lexical analysis of chapter 4, that the consonant cluster in
question can have this meaning).
This result means that even when subjects guess in an unconventional way,
they still guess within the semantic categories of the model. The answers
that can not be classified within the semantic categories of the model (the
column “unconventional category” of table 6.7) are fewer. Most of them
were produced by the Arabic and Ibo speaker, which suggests an
influence of cultural (or linguistic) differences, i.e. European vs. nonEuropean.9
9
These results are very preliminary and clearly a larger investigation is needed.
216
Table 6.9 Most commonly preferred meanings for unconventional but
possible meanings.
semantic features
quick or strong movement
wetness
adhesion
long thin form
rough surface structure
round form
form
pejorative
putting together
bodily feeling
mood
mental feeling
small size
destruction
beat
sound
light
number of
words
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6.7 General conclusions and discussion of the
cross language studies
The following conclusions can be drawn from the different contrastive
studies reported in this chapter: The Thesaurus study has shown that the
expression of phonesthemes can differ between languages as closely
related as English and Swedish. In some phonesthemes, however, the
expression (and meaning) is the same.
The study of interjections shows that there are similarities of expression
as well as of meaning between unrelated languages. There is variation of
expression within semantic categories, but certain sounds are still
preferred.
The study of expressions for animal calls in different languages shows
that there are similarities as well as differences. The understanding test
217
showed that it is quite easy for subjects to guess correctly on expressions
for animal calls in other languages. Some animals were more difficult to
identify. Often the type of animal was identified, e.g. bird or small
animal.
The last study, on interpretation of Swedish sound symbolic words and
non-words (constructed out of phonesthemes), showed that it was quite
difficult for subjects to interpret the meanings in accordance with the
Swedish norm, but that the misinterpretations most often were within the
semantic categories of the model in 2.6.2.
The general conclusion from these studies is that there are greater
differences between languages for expression than for meaning, in sound
symbolism. The more onomatopoeic expressions are easier to interpret
than other sound symbolism for speakers of other languages.
Interpretation of other sound symbolism often goes wrong (because
expressions differ in different languages), but the semantic categories
guessed on are most often within the semantic model of this thesis.
218
7 Experiments with constructed words containing
phonesthemes
7.1 Production and understanding
In section 1.4 the hypothesis was formulated that phonesthemes are
productive, to a greater or lesser degree. In order to test this hypothesis I
have carried out several experiments. The purpose of the experiments
that will be described in this chapter is to test this hypothesis, also in
more detail for some of the phonesthemes. In chapter 4 the results of the
lexical analysis made by one person were presented. The results of this
analysis are to a certain extent dependent on the idiosyncrasies of the
individual subject, the material and other circumstances and are therefore
preliminary. Therefore the results of the lexical analysis were used as a
basis for testing the sound symbolic value of certain consonant clusters on
a great number of individuals.
Method and materials
The tests (see Appendix 3) are constructed as free choice, multiple-choice
and matching tests.
Test 1.a. is a free choice test, which goes from meaning to expression, to
test the production of sound symbolism, e.g. "Invent a short word for
somebody who is stupid".
Test 1.b. is a forced choice test which also goes from meaning to
expression. An example of a task is: "Which of the following words fits
best for a person who is silly: a) pjotig b) brotig c) splotig?" Only one
answer should be possible according to the previous analysis. For some of
the questions, one of the answers is supposed to be clearly contradictory,
i. e. the expected answering score is zero (where there are contrasting
meanings, e. g. 'dry'-'wet'). In a few questions a word which sounds
similar to the test word, but with a non-expected cluster is included to test
which is more important, word analogy or sound symbolic clusters, e.g.
"Which of the following words best describes a broken (trasig) object". a)
bjatig b) skratig c) tratig?" Skr- is the expected cluster but tratig is very
similar to trasig.
219
Test 2.a is a free choice test which goes from expression to meaning in
order to test the understanding of presumptive sound symbolic clusters,
e.g. "What would be a good meaning for the word fnotig?"
In test 2.b, a forced choice test (which also goes from expression to
meaning), each nonsense word shall be matched with a certain number of
recurring meanings of a certain abstractness, e.g. "something which is
soft". More specifically, for each nonsense word tested there will be 3
alternative meanings, only 1 of which is possible according to the
previous analysis. An example of this is "What do you think slatig means:
a) somebody who is silly b) something that is dry c) something which is
unpleasant?"
Test 3 is a matching test where the subject has to choose between two
different meanings and two different expressions. An example of this is:
Which word best describes a thing that is wet and which word best
describes a thing that is dry: fnottig or skvottig?"
For the tests 2a and b, nonsense words were constructed from initial
consonant clusters that are commonly used for onomatopoeia and other
sound symbolism, according to the lexical analysis in chapter 4. To avoid
motivated meaning appearing in the non-initial part of the neologism the
words constructed are short. Also the endings (-t or -t:) of the neologisms
were checked in Svensk baklängesordbok (1981) in order to a v o i d
motivated meanings in the endings.
A complication with using monosyllables is that this syllable structure,
when repeated in a list, gives an impression of 'beat' or 'sound imitation',
especially when it ends in a long consonant. For this reason the test words
do not have a long consonant (except in a few test cases). Furthermore,
the test words have been added with the semantically neutral ending -ig.
A problem with this might be, however, that in using longer words, more
consonants and vowels will be involved, and it is more difficult to keep
control over entire test words.
220
Aside from constructing monosyllabic words (with an added ending -ig),
another simplification is that in natural sound symbolic words, the
semantic feature, e. g. 'pejorative', of an initial consonant cluster is often
repeated in the final consonant cluster (cf. 5.6).
As was shown in diagram 4.5, the 13 most common semantic features of
Swedish initial clusters are, in descending order: 'pejorative', 'sound',
'long thin form', 'quick or strong movement', 'wetness', 'talking', 'light',
'diminutive', 'round form', 'walking', 'destruction', 'winding form', 'bad
mood'. These semantic features were used in the tests except for 'sound',
'diminutive', 'round form' and 'way of walking'1 . Also some more
infrequent features, shown in the list below, were used. The formulations
on the test sheets correspond to the semantic features above in the way
shown in table 7.1.
Table 7.1 The semantic features corresponding to the formulations on the
test sheets.
formulations
löjlig (silly)
fånig (silly)
obehaglig (unpleasant)
dum och klumpig (stupid and
clumsy)
pratar dumheter (talks nonsense)
rak (straight)
smal form (narrow form)
rörelse fram och tillbaka (movement
back and forth)
plötslig rörelse (sudden movement)
(mycket) blöt ((very) wet)
semantic features
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative, talking
long thin form
long thin form
quick or strong movement
quick or strong movement
wetness
1 'Sound' was not tested since it is usually easier for speakers to produce sound imitative
words. 'Diminutive', 'round form', and 'walking' were not included because the final lexical
analysis was not completed at the time the test was constructed, and therefore these categories
were not included. The category of 'form' is, however, well represented in the study.
221
hur en människa kan låta (how a
person can sound)
starkt lysande (shining brightly)
trasig (broken)
slingrig form (winding form)
arg (angry)
på dåligt humör (bad mood)
ihålig (hollow)
pekar åt olika håll (pointing in
different directions)
går ihop (comes together)
(mycket) torr ((very) dry)
tydlig hård ytstruktur (pronounced
hard surface structure)
följsam ytstruktur (adaptable surface
structure)
sitter fast (sticks)
vidhäftande (sticking)
hårt slag (hard beat)
talking
light
destruction
winding form
bad mood
bad mood
hollow form
separation
putting together
dryness
rough surface structure
soft consistency
adhesion
adhesion
beat
The most common consonant clusters, in absolute numbers and
percentally, are shown in diagrams 4.1 and 4.4. In this test all of these
clusters except nj- are used. The tests includes the clusters: kl-, gr-, v r , spj-, str-, sp-, mj-, kv-, skv-, skr-, kr-, bl-, sm-, gr-, st-, tr, bl-, br-, spl-, gn-, spr-, fr-, sk-, kn-, gl-, sv-, dr-, pl-, s l - ,
sn, fl-, bj-, pj-, fn- and fj-.
The test words are grotig, gratig, vrotig, vratig, spjotig, spjatig, stratig,
spatig, mjatig, kvatig, skvatig, skratig, bjetig, bjatig, kretig, kratig, bletig,
blatig, smatig, statig, tratig, platig, fnatig, krotig, strotig, trotig, pjotig,
brotig, splotig, snitig, gnitig, gritig, klatig, spratig, smitig, gritig, spitig,
platig, snatig, smatig, dratig, blattig, mjattig, flattig, snattig, smattig,
drattig, etc (see Appendix 3).
222
Test procedure
The test questions were written four to a page and the pages were stapled
together. The test questions were mixed in order to keep the test words
from influencing each other (e.g. no two questions about 'light' were put
on the same page). The subjects were told not to go back and check and
were not given time for that either. Half of the subjects were tested in the
order: 1 (a)(b) -2(a)(b) -3 and the other half in the order 2 (a)(b) -1(a)(b)
-3 (see Appendix 3).
Test (a) which is free production, is the most difficult, test (b) which is
multiple-choice, is less difficult, and test 3, which is matching, is the
easiest. The largest number of presumed answers are expected for test 3
and the least number of presumed (or consistent) answers are expected for
1a and 2a.
The subjects were linguistics students at the beginner's level, with
Swedish as a first language, males and females, ages 21–57. There were
15 informants. 14 of them took the tests from meaning to expression and
15 informants took the tests from expression to meaning. Thirteen of
them took the matching test.
7.1.1 Forced choice for production
meaning to phonological (graphic) form
–
from
Of the 39 test questions where a meaning was presented along with three
alternatives for phonetic (graphic) form, one of which was possible
according to the model, 28 test questions showed a majority for expected
answers, 4 had a shared majority for the expected and an unexpected
answer and 7 showed a majority for an unexpected answer. Sometimes
the majority was overwhelming, sometimes not, see table 7.2.
The following 19 (out of 39) test questions received the best results: no.
37, 38, 39, 35, 30, 31, 32, 29, 21, 22, 23, 24, 13, 16, 9, 10, 5, 7 and 8
(cf. Appendix 3). These questions concerned the features and words
shown in table 7.2.
223
Table 7.2 The semantic features of the 19 test questions that received the best
results in the forced choice test of choosing phonological form from
different semantic features. Words are presented in order from best match
with expected to worst. 14 informants.
semantic feature
word
'pejorative'
'dryness'
'long thin form'
'wetness'
'bad mood'
'pejorative'
'wetness'
'pejorative'
'quick or strong
movement'
'adhesion'
'bad mood'
'separation'
'hollow form'
'wetness'
'quick or strong
movement'
'pejorative'
'hollow form'
'winding form'
'talking'
fjotig
fnotig
stratig
spatig
vratig
pjotig
platig
bjatig
flattig
ratio of expected
answers
14/14
13/14
13/14
13/14
13/14
13/14
12/14
12/14
12/14
klatig
tratig
spratig
gratig
svotig
skottig
12/14
12/14
11/14
11/14
11/14
11/14
drotig
grotig
krotig
snatig
11/14
10/14
9/14
9/14
Seen in relation to the number of instances of each feature there were in
the test, the semantic features shown in table 7.3 are the most successfully
interpreted:
224
Table 7.3 The most successfully interpreted semantic features of table 7.2.,
14 informants.
'wetness:'
'hollow form':
'separation':
'dryness':
'pejorative':
'bad mood':
'quick or strong movement':
'winding form':
'talking':
'adhesion':
'long thin form':
3/32 (100%)
2/2 (100%)
1/1(100%)
1/1(100%)
4/6 (67%)
2/3 (67%)
2/4 (50%)
1/2 (50%)
1/2 (50%)
1/2 (50%)
1/3 (33%)
The questions that did not give the expected answers pertained to the
features and words in table 7.4 (for a majority of subjects).
Table 7.4 Semantic features for neologisms that did not give the expected
answers. The substitutions of words (with frequencies) are shown in the
right column. 14 informants.
'winding form'
'light'
'light'
'quick or strong movement'
'light'
'light'
stratig (6) instead of kratig (4)
kratig (7) instead of blatig (3)
snitig (8) instead of gnitig (2)
mjatig (6) instead of flatig (3)
snotig (9) instead of gnotig (2)
kretig (6) instead of gletig (4)
It is clear that the 'light' feature gets least expected answers. The clusters
tested are the well known bl-, gl- and gn- clusters, but obviously
something more is required to get a light-associative effect. The 'light'
words might also belong to a closed lexical class which would imply that
gl- , gn-, bl- are not productive, unlike phonesthemes such as kl- or
2 i.e.
3 of the 3 wetness words were identified by most subjects.
225
pj-. Another possible explanation, in light of the results in 5.4, is that the
vowels have to be taken into account. The lexical analysis showed that
front vowels, and especially i, are much more common in root
morphemes with the features 'light' or 'gaze'. Two of the constructed
words in the test, gnitig and gletig, had front vowels (i and e) but were
nevertheless not interpreted according to expectations.
The feature most successfully coded in phonesthemes is 'wetness', for
which 3 out of 3 words where identified by most subjects, 'hollow form'
(2 out of 2), 'separation' (1 out of 1) and 'dryness' (1 out of 1), cf. table
7.3. The feature that is the least successfully interpreted is 'light'; none of
the 4 test words were interpreted according to expectations, cf. table 7.4.
Since some of the vowels in the constructed words were in accordance
with expectations, the non-expected results of the 'light' words can not be
explained with reference to the importance of vowels. It seems rather that
the 'light' phonesthemes are not productive. One explanation for why
they are not productive could have to do with the fact that 'light' is the
only category which is metaphorically connected with 'sound', i .e. by
sense analogy. Many other categories are connected metonymically with
sound, i.e. they occur simultaneously, e.g. 'movement', 'surface
structure', 'wetness', 'form', or are more abstract (cf. 2.5, 2.6).
7.1.2 Forced choice for understanding - from
phonological form to meaning
Out of the 38 test questions where a constructed word was presented
along with three meaning alternatives, one of which was possible (or most
possible3 ) according to the model of 2.6.2 and the analysis of chapter 4,
29 showed a majority for expected answers, 1 had a shared majority for
expected and unexpected answers and 8 had a majority for an unexpected
answer. Sometimes the majority was overwhelming, sometimes not. The
test questions that had the best results were the following: 24, 32, 26, 29,
21, 23, 25, 18, 10, 12, 5, 3, 4, 14. These questions concerned the words
and features presented in table 7.5.
3 The only exception is fnotig (question 23) where 'rough surface structure' is slightly more
expectable than 'dryness'. However, as can be seen in table 7.5, fnotig is interpreted as
'dryness' by 15 out of 15 subjects.
226
Table 7.5 The words in the test questions that received the best results in the
forced choice test of choosing meanings for different constructed words. 15
informants.
word
semantic feature
grotig
fnotig
snattig
pjotig
skottig
'hollow form'
'dryness'
'talking'
'pejorative'
'quick or strong
movement'
'separation'
'bad mood'
'pejorative'
'bad mood'
'pejorative'
'long thin form'
'talking'
'rough surface
structure'
'quick or strong
movement'
spratig
grotig
fjotig
vratig
blatig
spitig
snatig
skratig
flattig
ratio of expected
answers
15/15
15/15
15/15
15/15
14/15
14/15
11/15
13/15
13/15
12/15
12/15
11/15
10/15
10/15
The semantic features which were the most successful in the forced choice
test of choosing meanings for different constructed words were 'hollow
form' (for gr-), 'dryness' (for fn-), 'talking' (for sn-), and 'pejorative'
(for pj-)
The questions that did not give the expected results concerned the forms
and meanings in table 7.6 (for a majority of speakers).
227
Table 7.6 Words that did not give the expected answers. The substitutions of
features. 15 informants.
word
gnotig
flatig
gletig
gnitig
glatig
smatig
blatig
substitutions of
features
'talking' instead of
'light'
comment
This is in fact more
expectable according to
the analysis in 4.5
'long thin form' instead This is also expectable.
There might be an
of 'quick or strong
influence from the
movement'
word flat (flat).
'separation' instead of
'light'
'sticking' instead of
In this case a similar
'light'
word gnatig has no
influence. The third,
but not chosen,
alternative was actually
'talking' which is also
possible according to
the model
'pejorative' instead of
'Pejorative' is in fact
'light'
also expectable
according to the model
'pejorative' instead of
'Pejorative' is in fact
'beat'
also expectable
according to the model
'hollow form' instead
of 'light'
The semantic feature which is the least successful is 'light' (for gn-, gland bl-). Even where the vowel was front, as in gletig and gnitig, the
result was not according to expectations.
Summary of forced choice tests
In the first test, 28 out of 39 test questions showed a majority for
expected answers according to the model, and 19 of these received good
results, i.e. at least 64% (9/14) expected answers (table 7.2). In the second
test, 29 out of 38 test questions showed a majority for expected answers,
228
and 13 of these received good results, i.e. at least 67% (10/15) expected
answers.
In both tests the semantic feature which was the least successfully
interpreted or produced was 'light'. Even when the vowel was front,
according to expectations, the constructed words were not interpreted or
produced according to expectations. It thus seems as if the phonesthemes
connected with 'light' are not productive. In the test of meaning to
phonological form, 28 of the 39 test questions showed a majority for
expected answers. The six phonesthemes that were the most successfully
coded were 'pejorative': fj-, 'dryness': fn-, long thin form': str-,
'wetness': sp-, 'bad mood': vr-, 'pejorative': pj-. (The features most
successfully coded totally were 'wetness', 'hollow form', 'separation' and
'dryness'.) In the test from phonological form to meaning, 29 of the 38
test questions showed a majority for expected answers. The six
phonesthemes most successfully interpreted were 'hollow form': gr-,
'dryness': fn-, 'talking': sn-, 'pejorative': pj-, 'quick or strong
movement': sk- and 'separation': spr-. For both the interpretation and
production tests, the most successful cases were 'dryness': fn- and
'pejorative': pj-. Both of these are lexically low frequency clusters that
are sound symbolic to a very high degree.
7.1.3 Free production test from constructed words
to meanings
The free production test from constructed forms to meanings asked the
question "What do you think would be a good meaning for ...?" This gave
the results shown in table 7.7.
229
Table 7.7 Free interpretations by 15 subjects of 6 constructed words.
skvatig
fnotig
vratig
krötig
pjotig
skratig
härsken
(rancid)
blöt
(wet)
tröttsam
(tiring)
tråkig
(boring)
obeslutsam
(irresolute)
-
vrensk
(refractory)
tjatig
(nagging)
sned
(crooked)
tokig
(mad)
pjoskig
(mawkish)
barnslig
(childish)
skarp
(sharp)
glad
(happy)
bristfällig
(defective)
blöt
(wet)
torr och
fladdrig
(dry and
flapping)
fnasig
(chapped)
krokig
(crooked)
pustande
(panting)
vriden
(twisted)
stöddig
(stuck up)
trög
(sluggish)
ihopklumpad
(lumped
together)
trött och lite
sjuk
(tired and a
little ill)
tillgjord
(affected)
knotig
(bony)
sluddrande
(slurring)
fånig
(silly)
snurrig
(giddy,
crazy)
petig
(finical)
dum
(stupid)
gnetig
(crabbed)
dålig
(bad)
glad
(happy)
trög
(sluggish)
löjlig
(ridiculous)
gammal
(old)
knäpp
(stupid)
rörig
(messy)
mosig
(fuddled)
krokig
(crooked)
pjåskig
(mawkish)
ojämn
(uneven)
plaskig
(splashy)
kantig
(angular)
knyckig
(jerky)
smal
(narrow)
inkrökt
(focused on
one´s own
problems)
urgröpt
(hollowed
out)
berusad
(drunk)
besvärlig
(troublesome)
vissen
(withered)
fånig
(ridiculous)
full med
revor
(full of rips)
trasig
(ragged)
blöt
(wet)
kaxig
(cocky)
schlagermusik
(popular
song)
flamsig
(silly)
galen
(crazy)
blöt
(wet)
grov
(coarse)
tjatig
(nagging)
skrytsam
(boastful)
något kantigt
och blött
(sth angular
and wet)
skvalande
(pouring)
något svårt
(sth difficult)
skrumpen
(shrunk)
pratig
(chatty)
arg
(angry)
vrängd
(turned
inside out)
pratsam
tråkig
(talkative
boring)
tjatig
(nagging)
kantig eller
hård
(angular or
hard)
knölig
(knobbly)
arg
(angry)
230
liten
rar
(small
sweet)
skratta
(laugh)
frysa
(freeze)
vrida
(wring)
halvdålig*4
(half bad)
knäpp*
tokrolig*
(crazy
funny)
halvnerriven
vägreklam*
(half torn
down
advertizement by the
road side)
krånglig
(troublesome)
försupen*
(sottish)
passande
(suitable)
skrattande
(laughing)
löjlig*
liten*
(ridiculous
small)
en härjad
smal kvinna*
(a worn and
haggard thin
woman)
1. skvatig gives 6/15 expected answers, i.e., words with a semantic
feature 'wetness'. Of the other meanings only one gives an answer with a
feature 'wetness' – pjotig
2. fnotig gets the expected 'pejorative' in 5/14 (perhaps more depending
on which answers should be classified as 'pejorative'). It also gets the
expected 'dry' in 2/14. (cf. diagram 4.20).
3. vratig gives 3/15 clear answers containing the feature 'bad mood' and
some other answers which are less clear.
4. krötig does not give words with the expected semantic feature 'winding
form' but rather point to some sort of 'pejorative', which is the second
expected feature for kr- (cf. diagram 4.19).
5. pjotig, where the expected semantic feature 'pejorative' gives 10/15.
6. skratig, where expected semantic feature 'destruction' gives 7/15.
'Pejorative' has a higher percentage of skr- than 'destruction', but
'destruction' is typical for skr-, cf. table 4.16.
The nonsense word that is most successful is pjotig (pejorative). Pj- is
percentally the fourth most sound symbolic cluster (cf. diagram 4.4) and
is mainly 'pejorative' (cf. diagram 4.23). The second most successful
word is skratig, which only belongs to the eleventh most sound symbolic
cluster (percentally), skr-. However, it is a typical cluster for
'destruction'. In third place comes skvatig (wetness).
In other words, no constructed word is interpreted as expected by all
subjects, but all of the constructed words, except krötig (winding form),
are interpreted correctly by some subjects. Krötig is, however, given a
4 The * marks the answers from the subject who deviated most in the "matching test of
nonsense words and meanings" (see 7.1.5).
231
second best interpretation, 'pejorative'. The success ranking of these six
phonesthemes are thus, in order from best match to worst: 'pejorative'
(for pj-), 'destruction' (for skr-), 'wetness' (for skv-), 'pejorative' (for
fn-), 'bad mood' (for vr-), 'winding form' (for kr-).
There are examples both of where the associations have gone to a word
with a similar phonetic form, and examples of where the phonestheme has
an influence in spite of a similar sounding word5. An example of the first
case is krötig where the associations often seem to go to kröka (drink
alcohol): slang word): sluddrande, berusad, försupen. Skratig sometimes
gives associations to skratt (laughter): glad, skrattande. There are,
however, many answers under skratig which contain the meaning
component of 'destruction': bristfällig, lite sjuk, dålig, vissen, full med
revor, trasigt, en härjad smal kvinna.
The conclusion is that these nonsense words are interpreted in accordance
with expectations by some subjects, but not all. The nonsense words have
a phonesthemic meaning potential that is used by some subjects in the test
situation. The phonestheme most easily interpreted was 'pejorative': pj-.
Explanations for this might have to do with the fact that pj- is a lexically
low frequent highly sound symbolic cluster. 'Pejorative' is also the most
frequent semantic feature according to the lexical analysis. The cluster
most difficult to interpret was 'winding form': kr-. Kr- is lexically high
frequent but also sound symbolic to quite a high degree, however not
only with the feature 'winding form'. It seems as lexically low frequent
highly sound symbolic clusters are easy to access.
7.1.4 Free production from meaning to constructed
word.
The question "Make up a short word for somebody or something which is
(has) ...?", where subjects were supposed to invent an expression for one
of the meanings 'silly', 'winding', 'angry', 'dry', 'wet', and 'rough
surface', gave the results shown in table 7.8.
5 There are, as is well known, many types of relations in the lexicon, and thus relations
between words, as well as between phonesthemes, cf. e.g. Garman (1990).
232
Table 7.8 Words produced by 14 subjects for 6 different meanings. The
words are non-words. Most of them follow the Swedish phonotactic rules.
'silly'
'winding'
'angry'
'dry'
'wet'
'rough
surface'
smurk
spjal
flong
fjän
koos
flutt
floppig
pjöl
fjutt
krumpig
fnölp
loup*6
knork
slirv
islig
plyr
ril
pis
sjling
siloln
krel
kril
vrinlig
tirori
slio
evans*
vrom
gurp
kral
orn
vrag
faaby
grol
börr
vram
burr
trossk
rark
furn
hram*
dramm
lirv
spri
krasp
fnat
kirl
fnus
kritto
fnöl
krasp
prusskig
fnuskig
kln
srrats*
frok
slish
subl
svåsk
plat
trippp
svurp
slasli
svomm
mollo
schjaflig
splass
splurr
paupe*
blu
pritt
flarb
donk
raster
hitt
gilb
teppig
knupp
skrak
dank
nin
klik
kovo*
tlak
When it comes to the production of forms, we are not restricted to initial
clusters; the subjects have also used vowel qualities, reduplication and
final clusters to express the different meanings. However, initial clusters
are much more common in these neologisms. An analysis of the
neologisms produced follows below.
Semantic feature 'pejorative'
For the meaning 'silly' (semantic feature: 'pejorative') the produced
initial clusters in the test are, in frequency order: fl- (3), fj- (2), and then
one instance each of pj-, fn-, kn-, kr-, sm- and spj-. These results can
be compared with diagrams 4.6 and 4.7 where we see that pj- fn- and fjare very frequent percentally, while kn- and kr- are very frequent in
absolute numbers. Thus both percental and absolute frequency of
phonesthemes in the lexical analysis of chapter 4 correlate with the
6 The * marks the answers from the subject who deviated most in the "matching test of
nonsense words and meanings" (see 7.1.5).
233
clusters that the subjects use in free production of sound symbolic words.
The most frequently produced cluster fl- is quite frequent in absolute
numbers but not so frequent percentally. Only one of the produced words
contains a cluster which is not pejorative at all, namely spj-.
The final consonant clusters produced are, in frequency order: -rk (2),
and one instance each of -mp and -lp. These clusters can be compared
with tables 5.2 and 5.3 and diagrams 5.1 and 5.2. The tables show that mp can be pejorative (but is usually not), and that -rk and -lp are not
sound symbolic at all. The conclusion here must be that the final
consonant clusters are of less importance than the initial ones in
producing new pejorative words.
Semantic feature 'winding form'
For the semantic feature 'winding form', the produced initial clusters in
the test are, with two instances each: kr-, vr-, sl- pl- and sjl-. These can
be compared with table 4.16. The clusters that have the feature 'winding
form' are: kr- (typical) and sn- (possible). In other words, kr- is
expected. The cluster sjl- breaks the phonotactic pattern.
The final consonant clusters produced are, with one instance each: -rv, ln and -ns. Of these three, -rv and -ns can be sound symbolic according
to the analysis in chapter 5 (cf. tables 5.2 and 5.3). There are however, in
this analysis, no final consonant clusters with the feature 'winding form'
(only one word kringla).
Instead, there seems to be an iconicity in any position in the word for the
meaning 'winding form' reflected e.g. in a contrast between s and l, in
the words slirv, islig, sjling, siloln, slio. As seen earlier (cf. for
example diagram 4.1), sl- is also the most sound symbolic cluster in
absolute numbers. This issue is left for further research.
The vowels are mainly i, and there is a dominance for front, closed or
half closed vowels (with high F2).
234
Semantic feature 'bad mood'
For the meaning 'angry' (semantic feature: 'bad mood') the initial clusters
produced in the test are, in order of frequency: vr- (2) and one instance
of each of gr-, kr-, tr-, dr- and hr-. The most frequent ones, vr-, as trand gr- (and only these clusters) also have the semantic feature 'bad
mood' according to the earlier analysis. All the produced clusters except
one have an r, which is what the conventional ones have in common. The
last one, hr- breaks the phonotactic pattern. The phonestheme 'bad mood'
seems to have the expression obstruent + r.
The final consonant clusters produced are: -rn (2) (it is unclear if the
subjects pronounced this as a cluster or as a retroflex) and one instance
each of -rp, -rk, and -ssk. Obviously r dominates also in the final
clusters, the only exception being -ssk. According to the analysis in
chapter 5, there are no conventional final clusters with the semantic
feature 'bad mood', so the initial cluster phonemes seem to have been
transferred to the final position.
There are no front, closed or half closed vowels in these words but there
is a preference for vowels with lower F2.
Semantic feature 'dryness'
For the semantic feature 'dryness' the initial clusters produced in the test
are, in order of frequency: fn- (4), kr- (3) and one instance each of fr-,
pr-, spr-, srr-, kln (a whole word). The most frequent one fn- has the
semantic feature 'dryness' according to the earlier analysis, and fn- is the
only cluster with the feature 'dryness'. The remaining ones consequently
do not have the feature 'dryness'; srr- and kln break the phonotactic
pattern.
The final consonant clusters produced are: -sp, -sk, -rv, -ts and -dt.
'Dryness' is not a feature of final clusters according to the analysis of
chapter 5. The cluster -dt breaks the phonotactics. Again, the subjects
seem to encode the semantic feature in the initial cluster.
235
For 'dryness' there are more clusters that break the phonotactic pattern
than for the other semantic features. Perhaps this has to do with the fact
that 'dryness' is a very infrequent sound symbolic feature, e.g. in
comparison with wetness.
Semantic feature 'wetness'
For the semantic feature 'wetness', the initial clusters produced in the test
are, in order of frequency: sl- (2), sv- (2), spl- (2) and one instance each
of pl-, tr-, schj- [Sj], bl- and bw-. The clusters with the feature
'wetness' are two of the most common ones, sl- and sv- (but not spl-).
The remaining ones, pl- and bl-, also have the feature 'wetness', but not
tr-. Schj- [Sj] breaks the phonotactic pattern and bw- has the sound [w]
which is not even a phoneme in Swedish. So, for this feature, four
expected clusters are used, two unexpected ones and two unconventional.
The final consonant clusters produced are: -bl, -sk, -rp, -sl(i) and -fl.
Of these, the only final clusters for 'wetness', according to the analysis of
chapter 5, is -sk. -bl is not phonotactically possible in the absolute final
position.
In both the initial and final clusters produced for 'wetness' the most
common phonemes are the following: l (6 instances), s (5 instances) and
p (4 instances), as could be expected, cf. diagrams 4.14 and 4.15.
Semantic feature 'rough surface structure'
For the semantic feature 'rough surface structure', the initial clusters
produced in the test are: fl- (2) and one instance each of pr-, skr-, kn-,
kl-, tl-. Of these only skr- has the feature 'rough surface structure'. Tlbreaks the phonotactic pattern. There are other cluster with this feature,
fr- and kr-, according to the analysis in chapter 4, but they were not used
by the subjects. Perhaps the formulation in Swedish : 'tydlig, hård
ytstruktur' was not clear enough.
The final consonant clusters produced are: -Nk (2), -rb and -lb. In the
analysis of chapter 5, the only roots classified as 'rough surface structure'
236
are knottra (ttr) and rispa-raspa (sp). Rough surface structure is hardly a
feature of final consonant clusters.
Discussion of free production tests from meaning
to constructed word
Subjects seem to encode semantic features in the initial clusters rather
than in the final ones when producing new sound symbolic words. This is
mirrored in the results of chapter 5: many of the semantic features are
not conventionally encoded in specific final consonant clusters. However,
subjects do produce final clusters in these words, but these final clusters
seem to be either mirrored in the initial clusters or are haphazard. There
is of course also the possibility that semantic features other than those in
the study are relevant for final clusters.
Subjects do produce clusters that break phonotactics, both initially and
finally. For sound symbolically low frequent features (like 'dryness'),
with few possible clusters, there are more unconventional forms
produced.
The semantic features that to the greatest extent were expressed according
to the model were 'pejorative' (1637 ), 'bad mood' (18) and 'wetness'
(63). Less successfully expressed were 'winding form' (20), 'dryness' (1)
and 'rough surface' (10). There is a tendency for frequent features to be
more successfully coded. The initial consonant clusters of 'pejorative',
with the exception of one, are according to expectations. The most
commonly produced initial consonant clusters for 'bad mood' are in
accordance with the phonesthemes vr-, tr-, gr-. Of the rest of the words
produced all except one have an r. For the initial consonant clusters of
'wetness' the most common phonemes are: l, s and p. The feature
'winding form' stands out in that it uses the non-expected phonemes s and
l in different positions of the words. This might be an effect of the
trigger word 'slingrig form' ('winding form').
7 The
absolute frequencies of these features, for the initial clusters, are shown in table 4.2.
237
A matching test with context
Yet another study was done in order to shed further light on the results
presented in table 7.8. A matching test between the meanings and all
columns of words of table 7.88 was performed on a group of 9 linguistics
students with Swedish as their first language. The subjects were told to
match the six columns of expressions with a random list of the six
meanings.
This test gave 100 % correct results. The results depend partly on the
possibility of comparing the words in the different columns. We get an
effect from context. An isolated reading of the columns might be
somewhat more difficult, and might not yield the same degree of correct
results. Even more difficult would be to read (or hear) one word at a
time and suggest a meaning. Another interesting test would be to ask
people to pick out the word most suitable for every meaning of each
labeled column.
7.1.5 Matching
meanings
test
of
nonsense
words
and
In this test (Test 3), pairs of nonsense words, e.g. fnottig-skvottig, were
to be matched with pairs of contrasting meanings, e.g. 'wet' - 'dry'. The
subjects were 13 of those in tests 1 and 2. This test gave the following
results, for each question:
Question 1 (skv- 'wetness', fn- 'dryness'): 92 % expected answers
Question 2 (str- 'long thin form', kr- 'winding form'): 84% expected
answers
Question 3 (spr- 'separation', kn- 'putting together': 84% expected
answers
Question 4 (skr- 'rough surface structure', mj- 'soft consistency'): 100%
expected answers
Question 5 (fj- 'silly' (pejorative), vr- 'arg' (bad mood): 100% expected
answers.
8 One column of words is e.g. slirv, islig, plyr, ril, pis, sjling, siloln, krel, kril, vrinlig,
tirori, slio, evans, vrom.
238
In question 1, one person (out of 13) deviated, on questions 2 and 3 two
persons deviated. The same person deviated on questions 1, 2 and 3. In
other words, one person stands for 3 out of 5 unexpected answers. (This
is the person who's answers are marked with an * in tables 7.8. and 7.7.)
7.1.6 Summary of results of tests on interpreting
meanings and sounds
The forced choice tests
The forced choice tests (1b and 2b) had very good results for 19 out of
39 test questions in the test from meaning to constructed words, and 28
test questions showed a majority for expected answers. In the test from
constructed words to meaning (1a and 2a) 14 out of 38 test questions
showed very good results, and 29 test questions showed a majority for
expected answers. This is an overall good result for the interpretation of
the hypothesized phonesthemes. The phonesthemes that were most
successfully interpreted in the test from meaning to constructed words
were fj- 'pejorative', fn- 'dryness', str- 'long thin form', sp- 'wetness',
vr- 'bad mood', and pj- 'pejorative'. The phonesthemes that were most
successfully interpreted in the test from constructed words to meaning
were gr- hollow form', fn- 'dryness', sn- 'talking' and pj- 'pejorative'.
Combining the results of both tests, pj- 'pejorative' and fn- 'dryness'
were the most successful.
The question arises whether the interpretation of semantic features in
general correlate with the most frequent features according to the lexical
analysis. The features 'pejorative': pj- and 'dryness': fn- (both lexically
small clusters with a high degree of sound symbolism) showed the highest
expected correlations between meaning and sound among the six most
successful features for both forced choice meaning to constructed word
and constructed word to meaning tests (tables 7.2 and 7.5). It seems then
that it is generally easier to interpret and code phonesthemes of lexically
low frequent, highly sound symbolic clusters. The meaning that gave the
smallest number of expected answers was 'light', (also for interpreting
sounds). There were five test words with the expected feature 'light' and
the clusters tested were bl-, gl- and gn-. Even when the vowel was in
accordance with the expectations of the lexical analysis, i.e. having an i or
239
e vowel like in gletig and gnitig, the words were not interpreted as 'light'
by a majority of speakers, and the category 'light' was not coded with bl, gl- or gn- by a majority of speakers. , To quite a great extent, gn- is a
lexically low frequent, highly sound symbolic cluster, as is the case with
bl- and gl. However, this does not seem to be enough for productivity.
As mentioned above, the 'light' phonesthemes (which are not productive9 )
have the only semantic feature which is metaphorically connected with
sound.
The free production tests
The free production of meanings or words tests (1a and 2a) gave a
variety of meanings and new sound symbolic words, many of which were
predicted but some were not. In the free production test from form to
meaning no constructed word was interpreted as expected by all subjects,
but all of the constructed words (except one which is given a second best
interpretation) are interpreted correctly by some of the subjects. The
success ranking of the six phonesthemes are, in order from best match to
worst: 'pejorative' (for pj-), 'destruction' (for skr-), 'wetness' (for skv), 'pejorative' (for fn-), 'bad mood' (for vr-), 'winding form' (for kr-).
The features (of the six tested) that were most successful were
'pejorative', 'bad mood', and 'wetness'. Also the fact that all the test
subjects willingly produced nonsense words, and meanings from nonsense
words, is an interesting result. Thus, these nonsense words are interpreted
in accordance with expectations by some subjects, but not all. The
nonsense words have a phonesthemic meaning potential that is used by
some subjects in the test situation.
The free production test from meaning to form shows that phonesthemes
are used. This test also shows that for all semantic features both percental
and absolute frequencies of the lexical analysis correlate with the clusters
that the subjects use in free production of sound symbolic words. Subjects
seem to encode semantic features in the initial clusters rather than in the
final ones when producing new sound symbolic words. They also produce
clusters that break phonotactic rules, both initially and finally. The
9 There may well be productive 'light' phonesthemes, but it might be the case that the
expression side of these phonesthemes has to include a vowel, e.g. i.
240
semantic features that to the greatest extent were expressed according to
the model, were 'pejorative', 'bad mood' and 'wetness'. Less successfully
identified were 'winding form', 'dryness' and 'rough surface'. There is a
tendency for frequent features to be more successfully coded.
For both free production tests, the most successful features (out of six
possible) were 'pejorative', 'bad mood' and 'wetness'.
Thus in both the forced choice tests and free production tests the most
successful semantic feature is 'pejorative'.
The matching test
The matching test (c), where two words are to be matched with two
semantic features, produced the highest percentages of expected answers.
The results partly depend on the possibility to compare the word pairs.
We get an effect from context.
Summary and discussion
Most of the phonesthemes are more or less successfully interpreted or
coded, while some are more clearly not interpreted or coded. In table 7.9
below, the phonesthemes that were the most successfully interpreted and
coded in the experiments are presented, in order to show which are
recurring in the different experiments.
241
Table 7.9 The phonesthemes most successfully interpreted or coded in
experiments with neologisms.
Test:
forced
choice
from
meaning to
Phone- phonol.
stheme: form
pejorative:
most
success- f j dryness:
ful
phone- f n sthemes long thin
form:
strwetness:
spbad mood:
vrpejorative:
pjlight:
least
success- gnful
phonesthemes
free
production
from
meaning to
phonol.
form
hollow form: pejorative
(several
grclusters)
dryness:
bad mood
fn(several
talking:
clusters)
snwetness
pejorative:
(several
pjclusters)
quick or
strong
movement:
skseparation:
sprlight:
winding
form,
gndryness,
light:
glrough
surface
forced
choice from
phonol.
form to
meaning
free
production
from
phonol.
form to
meaning
pejorative:
pj-
matching test
winding
form:
kr-
-
rough
surface
structure vs.
soft
consistency:
skr- vs mjpejorative
vs.
bad mood:
fj- vs. vr-
As can be seen from table 7.9 the most successful phonestheme is
'pejorative': pj- and the least successful is 'light': gn- and 'winding form'
(kr-). Pj- and gn- are lexically low frequent, highly sound symbolic
clusters.
The clusters of most of the most successful phonesthemes in table 7.9
above – fj-, fn-, vr-, pj-, spr-, skr- and mj- – are lexically low
242
frequent, very sound symbolic clusters. Str-, sp-, gr-, sn- and sk- are
not. The most successful semantic feature of table 7.8 is 'pejorative'. The
general success of the feature 'pejorative' is discussed in chapter 8. Of the
least successful phonesthemes, gn- is lexically low frequent, highly sound
symbolic, but not gl- and kr-. The degree of success in these tests is not
then exclusively restricted to the lexically low frequent, highly sound
symbolic clusters.
243
8 Summary and discussion
The purpose of this thesis has been to study different aspects of sound
symbolism – with special reference to Swedish. The largest part of the
descriptive study has been devoted to Swedish phonesthemes. Initial and
final consonant clusters were primarily studied, but vowels were also
included.
Other important issues have been: studying productivity of new sound
symbolic words and similarities between languages (connected with the
issue of universals), and finding a reasonable explanatory model for (a
part of) sound symbolism in Swedish.
The role of sound symbolism in language was discussed and a model for
the position of sound symbolism in language was constructed, taking a
number of factors into account, such as innateness, learning, productivity,
context and conventionalization. (cf. 1.9).
The sound symbolic properties of consonant clusters and vowels were
described – the expressions and the meanings. The meanings of
phonesthemes were found to be relatable to each other and different
explanations for the relationship between sound and meaning in sound
symbolism were also discussed, especially in relation to indexicality and
iconicity. A semantic model for explaining the different semantic features
of sound symbolism was constructed.
With a point of departure in the description of Swedish phonesthemes a
number of studies were made in order to investigate universality and,
above all, the role of productivity.
8.1 The research questions were as follows:
1. What are the properties of sound symbolic sounds and sound sequences
in Swedish? More specifically the questions are:
Which initial and final consonant clusters are used in sound
symbolism?
245
Which meanings are used in sound symbolism?
How do these combine in phonesthemes?
What are the sound symbolic characteristics of some vowels?
How do initial and final clusters and vowels combine in words?
2. Are phonesthemes productive in Swedish? And, if so, are some
phonesthemes more productive than others? Are neologisms created or
interpreted in accordance with the semantic model of chapter 2 and the
analysis of chapters 4 and 5?
3. Are there similarities or dissimilarities between different languages in
some aspects of sound symbolism?
4. Do non-Swedish speakers interpret Swedish phonesthemes in
accordance with the semantic model of chapter 2 and the analysis of
chapters 4 and 5?
The results pertaining to these questions are summarized and discussed
below:
8.1.1 Question 1
What are the properties of sound symbolic sequences in Swedish?
The lexical study of initial consonant clusters hints at about 1,000 roots
with sound symbolic beginnings of the 65,000 lexemes (or 8,300 root
morphemes1) in the Swedish vocabulary. The initial consonant clusters
vary in the degree to which they are sound symbolic and the same is true
for the final clusters and the vowels. Almost all initial consonant clusters
and about 22% of the final clusters are used for sound symbolism. (From
the experiments in chapter 7 it seems that the final consonant clusters are
of less importance than the initial ones in producing new words, see
below.)
1
This number of morphemes is the result of an investigation of a one million word
newspaper corpus (NFO 4). It is most probable that newspaper language contains
more roots than spoken language, but these figures are not known at present. The
estimate of 65, 000 lexemes excludes transparent compounds.
246
A restricted number of meanings that are semantically relatable to each
other are used in Swedish phonesthemes. These are in most cases
connected with perception or cognition (cf. the models in 1.9 and 2.6.2).
A consonant cluster usually has more than one possible sound symbolic
meaning, and the semantic profiles vary for different clusters.
The most frequent semantic features for initial and final clusters are
partly the same and partly different. For the initial clusters, the 10 most
common features are, in descending order:
Table 8.1 The 10 most common
semantic features of initial clusters.
'pejorative'
'sound'
'long thin form'
'quick or strong movement'
'wetness'
'talking'
'light'
'diminutive'
'round form'
'walking'
For the final clusters, the 10 most common semantic features of Svensk
Baklängesordbok and the 6 most common features of Nusvensk
Frekvensordbok 4 (NFO 4) are shown in table 8.2.
When the most common semantic features of final clusters of Svensk
Baklängesordbok and Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 4 are combined, the
following features are most frequent, in descending order: 'sound' and
'pejorative', 'talking', 'quick or strong movement', 'long thin
form', 'wetness' and 'slang' ,'walking', 'round form', 'light'.
247
The first six features are also the six most common features of initial
clusters, cf. table 8.1 (cf. also table 5.4).
Table 8.2 The 10 most common semantic features of final clusters of
Svensk Baklängesordbok and the six most common features of the
Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 4.
Svensk Baklängesordbok
'quick or strong movement'
'talking'
'sound'
'pejorative'
'slang'
'walking'
'wetness'
'long thin form'
'round form'
'light'
Nusvensk Frekvensordbok 42
'pejorative'
'sound'
'long thin form'
'talking'
'wetness'
'quick or strong movement'
This can be compared with the features that were the most successfully
coded and interpreted in the experiments of chapter 7. In the experiments
of free production tests from meaning to constructed word, 'pejorative',
'bad mood', and 'wetness' were the most successful.
Of the six features listed above 'pejorative and 'wetness' were the most
successful in the experiments of free production tests from meaning to
constructed word.
In the forced choice tests the most successful semantic features were
'pejorative' and 'dryness' ('sound', 'diminutive', 'round form' and
'walking' were not tested in the forced choice experiments, see 7.1).
2There
are only six semantic features in this column since they are the result of the
analysis presented in table 5.18, which showed the most common clusters and their
semantic features; other semantic features are therefore not very frequent in Nusvensk
Frekvensordbok 4.
248
Of the six features listed above, 'pejorative' was the most successful in the
forced choice tests.
The phonological characteristics of the most common sound symbolic
clusters, initially and finally and in particular for certain meanings, were
as follows:
Initial clusters
For initial clusters, the most common ones (cf. table 4.8) are sl(absolutely) and pj- (percentally). For the five most frequent meanings,
in absolute numbers, there is a strong tendency for the consonant clusters
to end with l. For the five most frequent meanings, percentally, there is a
slight tendency that the consonant clusters end with j. The clusters ending
with j are lexically low frequent ones and are thus marked. This can
make them more useful for sound symbolic functions, cf. 8.3.
Considering specific semantic features, the results for the initial clusters
are: all two-consonant clusters containing a j-phoneme are 'pejorative'
and they are so to quite a great extent. Looking at absolute figures,
clusters beginning with s, especially sl-, sn-, skr- are dominant among
the pejorative roots. The semantic feature 'bad mood' is mainly coded
with the clusters gr-, vr- and tr- (but these clusters can have many other
meanings). Furthermore 'light' is dominated by voiced plosives + l or n –
bl-, gl-, gn- (dl-, bn-, dn- are not allowed in Swedish) – and 'wetness' is
dominated by sl-, kl-, sp-, sm-, skv-, spr-, sn-, bl-, pl-, sv-, i.e. s or
initial unvoiced plosives are preferred (the only exception is bl-). The
feature 'long thin form' is dominated by three three-consonant clusters:
spj-, str-, spr-. These all begin with s (a fact of all Swedish initial threeconsonant clusters). In addition, with the exception of two clusters
connected with the feature 'long thin form', the above mentioned clusters
plus sp-, sl-, sn-, st-, sk- and sv-, also begin with an s. The only ones
that do not begin with s are tr- and tv-. These are however, voiceless
dentals like s.
249
Most clusters that are percentally most frequent are lexically very
infrequent ones, cf. discussion in 8.3.
The results of the lexical analysis of chapter 4 concerning the pj'pejorative' cluster, the gr-, tr-, vr- 'bad mood', the skr- 'destruction',
the skv- 'wetness' and the fn- 'dryness' clusters correlate with the results
of the free production or free interpretation experiments of chapter 7 (cf.
question 2 below).
Final clusters
As discussed in the beginning of chapter 5, it is not self-evident which are
the final clusters in Swedish. Morphological structure has to be taken into
account since some sequences only occur in inflected or derived forms
(e.g. -ndsk in bondsk) and some sequences, which are obviously
interesting, cannot occur in the absolutely final position (e. g. -dr- as in
fladdra. The meaning profiles for the sound symbolic final clusters differ,
as is also the case for initial clusters, cf. diagrams 5.3–5.11.
For the final clusters, the main results are as follows: The most common
clusters with sound symbolic meaning, in order of frequency –
independent of meaning - are the following (from NFO4): - Nk, -sk, -fs,
-nd, -tr (absolutely) or -fs, -dr, -lr, -ml, - Nl (percentally)3. Of these, 5
of 9 end with a liquid. Of the 11 percentally most sound symbolic final
consonant clusters, 8 end with a liquid and 3 with a voiceless obstruent (s
or k). Of the 13 most common final consonant clusters in absolute
numbers, 6 end with a liquid and 7 with a voiceless obstruent (s, t or k).
The high frequency of liquids and voiceless obstruents among the final
clusters could be due to lexical dominance of these clusters. (Swedish final
clusters can also end in voiced obstruents and nasals.) It is beyond the
scope of this thesis to investigate this issue. The high sound symbolic
frequency of liquids and voiceless obstruents could also have to do with
the fact that they are especially suited for certain meanings. As seen in
table 5.3, however, none of the two groups are especially tied to any
3The
five most frequent final clusters have a percentage of 100% because there is only
one – sound symbolic – root, for every cluster. These are not considered here, cf.
however, diagram 5.2.
250
semantic feature. In the NFO 4 material, -fs (pejorative) is the most
common phonestheme both absolutely and percentally (cf. tables 5.18 and
5.19).
It is not the case, for final clusters, that the high frequent semantic
features seem to prefer certain sounds or sound combinations, cf. table
5.3. The more low frequent semantic features, however, use certain
consonant clusters: 'wetness' -ska; 'long thin form' -msa; 'round form' lla; 'light' -indra, -imra; 'shortwide form' -mpa. These clusters, except
for -indra, -imra ('light') are, as can be seen in table 5.3, used by other
semantic features as well.
Vowels
Vowels, a selection of which were studied in minimal pairs, seem to have
other semantic characteristics than consonant clusters, often modifying the
meaning of consonant clusters, e.g. being diminutive or augmentative. [i]
tends to have the meanings 'smallness', 'quickness', 'high pitch', while [P]
seems to have the meanings of 'low pitch' and 'largeness'. [a] seems
neutral. The vowel [P] is also connected with 'pejorative'. The semantic
feature 'light' is connected with front vowels, especially with [i].
Combinations
The study of combinations of initial and final consonant clusters showed
that it is more common for semantic features to be the same initially and
finally, than to be different. If new semantic features had been searched
for in the investigation of final clusters, there is a possibility that this
result would have to be modified, because of the appearance of new roots.
The semantic features under consideration are however, mostly the same
initially and finally.
It seems then, that initial and final clusters strengthen each other rather
than contributing to different sound symbolic meanings in the same root.
However, for those consonant clusters that can occur both initially and
finally it is not the case that they are combined in the same word, e.g. bland -bl, but neologisms as blabbla are conceivable.
251
8.1.2 Question 2
Are phonesthemes productive in Swedish? And, if so, are some
phonesthemes more productive than others? Are neologisms created and
interpreted in accordance with the semantic model of chapters 1 and 2 and
the analysis of chapters 4 and 5? The model of 1.9 says, among other
things, that sound symbolism is productive. Furthermore, the model of
2.6.2 claims that semantic features of sound symbolism are, due to the
innateness of categories of thinking - such as predispositions for seeing
contiguity and similarity, and due to learning - relatable to sense
impressions and emotions, restricted to certain types.
The characteristics of the consonant clusters (cf. above, question 1) are
mirrored in the experiments of chapter 7 in the following way:
Forced choice tests
The phonesthemes, in the constructed words, that were the most
successfully coded, i.e. given a phonological form based on a presented
semantic feature, were 'pejorative': fj-, 'dryness': fn-, long thin form':
str-, 'wetness': sp-, 'bad mood': vr-, 'pejorative': pj-. The features most
successfully coded totally were 'wetness', 'hollow form', 'separation' and
'dryness'. The six phonesthemes most successfully interpreted were
'hollow form': gr-, 'dryness': fn-, 'talking': sn-, 'pejorative': pj-, 'quick
or strong movement': sk- and 'separation': spr-. For both the
interpretation and production tests, the most successful phonesthemes
were 'dryness': fn- and 'pejorative': pj-. Both of these are (lexically low
frequent) clusters that are sound symbolic to a very high degree. A
possible explanation for the success of these phonesthemes is that they can
be more easily accessed. Phonesthemes could be stored in a way different
from other morphemes since there is a motivated connection between
sound and meaning. This could make them more reliable and more
frequent in production and interpretation.
The 'light' words stand out because of many instances of bad results, both
in the word-to-meaning and meaning-to-word tests. It is clear that the
'light' category gets the least number of expected answers. The 'light'
words might belong to a closed lexical class which would imply that g l - ,
252
gn-, bl-, are not productive, unlike phonesthemes such as kl- or pj-.
Even when the 'light' words had a vowel with high F2, as many of the
'light' words have according to 5.4, the results of the experiment were no
better. The semantic feature 'light' is positioned quite high in the analysis
of the most common features (cf. diagram 4.5).
Free production tests
Phonesthemes
In the free production test from expression to meaning, the percentally
most common phonestheme pj- (pejorative) was the most accurately
identified. In the free production test from meaning to expression the j clusters, among others, for 'pejorative' were produced as expected. The
r-clusters for 'bad mood' were also produced as expected, plus some
additional r-clusters, both initial and final. For the feature 'wetness',
there was a majority of s-, l- and p-clusters (as expected), both initially
and finally.
Explanations of these results, for the j-clusters, could have to do with the
facts that these are (lexically low frequent) clusters that are sound
symbolic to a very high degree; they could thus be more easily accessed
and this could, in turn, make them more reliable – and frequent – in
production and interpretation. As concerns the r-clusters for 'bad mood'
they can have their base in expressions which are spontaneous
vocalizations in connection with an angry feeling, and the s-, l- and pclusters for 'wetness' have their base in sound imitation. The question of
whether one of these bases gives better results than the other in
interpretation and production cannot be answered from these experiments
alone; further experimentation is needed.
The phonestheme most difficult to interpret was 'winding form': kr-.
Semantic features
The semantic features of the free production meaning to word
experiments that were most successfully expressed (in accordance with the
lexical analysis) were 'pejorative' (163), 'bad mood' (18) and 'wetness'
(63). Less successfully expressed were 'winding form' (20), 'dryness' (1)
253
and 'rough surface' (10) (The absolute frequencies of these semantic
features, for the initial clusters, are shown within the parenthesis, cf. table
4.2.) These results can be compared with the most frequent semantic
features according to the lexical analysis summarized in tables 8.1 and
8.2. Of the three most successful features – 'pejorative', 'bad mood' and
'wetness' – of the free production experiments, 'pejorative' and 'wetness'
are among the six most common features according to the lexical analysis.
A probable explanation for these similarities is that phonesthemes of the
most frequent semantic features are stored in such a way that they are
more accurately accessed by the language user. The way they are stored is
dependent on stable intermodal connections, cf. the discussion in 1.11.2.
Of the three less successful features of the free production experiments 'winding form', 'dryness' and 'rough surface' - none belonged to the 10
most common semantic features of the lexical analysis. A probable
explanation for this is that the phonesthemes of the less frequent semantic
features are stored in such a way that they are less accurately accessed.
The conclusion is that phonesthemes are – more or less – productive, both
in production of new forms and understanding of neologisms. There is a
tendency for the most common semantic features to be more successfully
coded, in accordance with the main results of the analysis of
phonesthemes in chapter 4; these might be more accessible. It could also
be the case that categories related to negative emotions (e.g. 'pejorative',
'bad mood') are more important to humans (at least Swedes) than more
abstract categories like 'form'. It also seems that subjects tend to encode
semantic features in the initial clusters rather than in the final ones in free
production, and it seems that for low frequent features (like 'dryness'),
with few possible clusters, there are a larger number of unconventional
forms produced. These tendencies need to be investigated further.
An interesting result from the free choice test from expression to
meaning is that the meanings produced all belong to the classes found in
the lexical study. Even the informants who started the test by freely
suggesting meanings based on constructed neologisms (and therefore had
no expectancies as to what the answers ought to be) produced meanings
254
within these classes (although not always within the expected class for a
certain nonsense word - the reason for this might be individual contextual
influences at the moment of the test). These classes are: 'pejorative' (often
'destruction'), 'mental feeling' (often irritated), 'surface structure',
'wetness', 'form', 'consistency', 'movement', 'diminutive', 'sound'. These
results can also be compared with the most frequent semantic features
according to the lexical analysis summarized in table 8.1. Six of the nine
general semantic features resulting from the free choice test from
expression to meaning ('pejorative', 'wetness', 'form', 'movement',
'diminutive' and 'sound') are among (or superordinate to) the nine most
common semantic features of table 8.1. This supports the model of 2.6.2
where the phonesthemes for these categories are seen as a result of
innateness, learning and conventionalization; the semantic categories of
phonesthemes are predictable rather than haphazard. This model shows
that in many cases the semantic features of phonesthemes are potentially
relatable to neurological connections between the senses, cf. 8.3.2. It
could also imply that phonesthemes that concern the most frequent
semantic features are stored in such a way that they are most readily and
accurately accessed4.
8.1.3 Question 3
Are there similarities or dissimilarities between different languages in
various aspects of sound symbolism,?
In the Thesaurus study of the concepts 'stupidity', 'rough surface
structure', and 'smooth surface structure', for English and Swedish, the
following was found: The phonological agreement between words
belonging to these semantic fields in English and Swedish was greater
among the words for 'surface structure' than for the words for
'pejoratives'. One obvious reason is that some of the clusters used in
Swedish (fj-, fn-, pj-) are not allowed in English. Another reason could
be that 'surface structure' is closer to a potentially common phenomenon,
namely sound imitation, since stroking different surfaces give different
4This
is a question for further experiments, e.g. lexical decision experiments, and
development of on line models.
255
sound effects. Of course, Swedish and English have many cognates but not
in these results (cf. 6.2), except for some cases.
In the tests with informants concerning different interjections in 8
languages the following similarities and dissimilarities were found
concerning expressions: The pejorative interjections often contain an u or
an O, the positive interjections an a, 'surprise' often an a or an O. 'Pain'
(e.g. Swedish aj) has a diphtongized open vowel, 'sneeze' (e.g. Swedish
atjo) has an affricate and the interjection for go away (to an animal) (e.g.
Swedish schas) has a fricative in all the 8 languages.
In the tests with informants of 16 different languages concerning different
expressions that are imitative of animal noises, the main results are the
following: No animal call imitation is exactly the same in all the 16
languages. Some animal call imitations are more alike, e.g. the cat's
meow, while others vary more, e.g. the dog's barking. One reason for
this could be that some animal cries are more complicated than others.
There are, however, always similarities on the level of phonetic features
between the expressions for the same animal call in the different
languages. Within each language there are, as well as for the expressive
interjections, similarities which can be assumed to depend on the
phonological structure of the language in question.
In the identification test, expressions for different animal sounds by
speakers of 9 different languages were tested on 15 persons with 6
different first languages. The main results are that some animals were
identified by all listeners (e.g. dog, cow and cat), some less correctly
identified and one animal not identified at all (e.g. duck, Hungarian
expression). The interpretation test shows that, given the context of
animal calls, it was quite easy for listeners to interpret animal calls from
languages other than their own (cf. table 6.6).
Thus, for these contrastive studies, the following general conclusion can
be drawn. There are both similarities and dissimilarities between the
256
expressions in the different languages5. This is true for most phenomena
in language, and sound symbolism is no exception here. The variation is
greater for some semantic fields than for others; expressions for rough or
smooth surface structure are more alike than expressions for pejoratives.
A possible explanation of this is that 'surface structure' is closer to a
potentially common phenomenon, namely sound imitation, either because
stroking different surfaces give different sound effects or because of the
auditory-tactile neural connection. Certain animals are imitated more
consistently than others, possibly because certain animal cries are shorter
and less complicated than others, cf. e.g. the cries of the cat and the
rooster.
8.1.4 Question 4
Do non-Swedish speakers interpret Swedish phonesthemes in accordance
with the semantic model of chapter 2 and the analysis of chapters 4 and 5?
In the test of understanding Swedish sound symbolic words (and some
neologisms constructed from phonesthemes) the general results are as
follows: The subjects seldom interpreted the words correctly. However,
the answers given almost all belong to categories within the semantic
model of 2.6.2 (cf. table 6.7). It therefore seems that for certain
categories, often related to sense impressions or emotions, there is a
preference for sound symbolic expressions; it is more natural for
speakers to imagine that an unknown word, where the expression is
supposed to reflect the meaning, means e.g. 'quick or strong movement'
than that it means e.g. 'my country'.
The conclusion from the studies under questions 3 and 4 is that there are
greater differences between these languages6 for expression than for
meaning. The expressions imitating animal sounds are easier to interpret
than other sound symbolism for speakers of different languages.
5 For crosslinguistic studies in other semantic fields, see e.g. Viberg (1999).
6Swedish, English, Icelandic, Polish, Hungarian, Finnish, Ososo, Malagasi,
Slovenian, Korean, Japanese, Chinese, Estonian, Urdu, Persian, Kurdish, Arabic and
Spanish. Persons who interpreted Swedish sound symbolic words spoke Arabic,
Spanish, German, Dutch, Ibo, English.
257
Interpretation of other sound symbolism often goes wrong (because
expressions probably differ in different languages), but the semantic
categories guessed at are most often within the semantic models of this
thesis.
8.2. Comparison of the studies
The next table (8.3) is a comparison between the most frequent
phonesthemes of the lexical studies with the most accurately interpreted
and coded phonesthemes of the experimental studies. The most common
clusters and the most common meanings are also shown. The data are
from different tables and diagrams as indicated in table 8.3.
Table 8.3 The most frequent7 phonesthemes or the most successful8
phonesthemes (their consonant clusters and meanings), whichever is most
appropriate, from the different studies. The examples are presented in
frequency order. In some cases, however, consecutive examples might
have the same frequency.9
7According
to the lexical analysis.
the case of the experiments where subjects produced or interpreted neologisms.
9Squares are empty for the experiments where there are no relevant data.
8In
258
phonesthemes
consonant
meanings
clusters
lexically
initial
pejorative:
in absolute
pejorative,
consonant
sl-, pj-
numbers:
sound, long
clusters
sound:
sl-, sn-, kn-,
thin form,
kl-, kn-, fn-
kr-, kl-, sp-,
quick or strong
long thin form:
gl-, st-, tr-
movement,
sp-, spj-
(cf. diagram
wetness,
quick or strong
4.1)
talking, light,
movement:
diminutive,
fl-
in %:
round form,
wetness:
fn-, gn-, skv-
walking (cf.
sl-, skv- 10
, pj-, kn-,
diagram 4.5)
spr-, spj-, gl, mj-, vr- (cf.
diagram 4.4)
final consonant
quick or strong
-N k, -sk,-fs, -
sound,
clusters
movement: -N l,
nd, -tr (cf.
pejorative,
talking: -tr,
diagram 5.1
talking,
sound: -st,
and table 5.21)
quick or strong
pejorative: -fs,
-dr, -lr, -ml,
movement,
wetness: -sk,
-N l
long thin form,
12
wetness13
long thin form
-N k 11
experi-
forced choice14
fj-: pejorative
wetness,
mentally
meaning to
fn-: dryness
hollow form
expression
str-: long thin
separation
form
dryness,
sp-: wetness
pejorative (cf.
vr-:bad mood
table 7.3)
pj:pejorative15
10From
table 4.8.
tables 5.3 and 5.18.
12From NFO4, diagram 5.2 (except for the 1 root clusters).
13From NFO4 and Svensk Baklängesordbok, section 5.5.3.
11From
259
forced choice
gr-: hollow
expression to
form
meaning16
fn-: dryness
sn-: talking
pj-: pejorative
sk-: quick or
strong
movement
spr-:
separation17
free production
pj-: pejorative
expression to
skr-:
meaning
destruction
skv-:
wetness18
free production
pejorative: fl-,
meaning to
fj-
expression
bad mood: rclusters
wetness: sl-,
sv- 19
cross
f l20-: quick or
quick or strong
cultural
strong
movement21
interpreta-
movement
tion
skr- :
destruction
tr-: bad mood
14The
semantic feature 'sound' was not tested.
table 7.2.
16For both the production and interpretation experiments added together, the most
successful phonesthemes were fn-: 'dryness' and pj-: 'pejorative'
17From table 7.5.
18From table 7.7.
19From table 7.8.
20Phonesthemes of words that were most successfully interpreted according to the
Swedish norm. Cf. table 6.8.
21Most preferred meaning for unconventional but possible meanings. 'Pejorative' and
'sound' were NOT among the more preferred meanings. Cf. table 6.9.
15From
260
Table 8.3 shows, among other things, the following relations between
different studies: The most successful initial phonesthemes of the
experimental studies that correspond to initial phonesthemes of the most
frequent semantic features are: pj-: pejorative (initial consonant clusters,
forced choice meaning to expression, forced choice expression to
meaning, free production expression to meaning); skv-:wetness (initials,
free production expression to meaning); sl-:wetness (initials, free
production meaning to expression) in this most condensed version of the
results.
Sl- is the percentally largest cluster for 'wetness' (and THE most sound
symbolic cluster – for all semantic features – in absolute figures), pj- is
the percentally largest 'pejorative' cluster and skv- is the percentally fifth
largest wetness cluster22. Pj- and skv- are both small but percentally
highly sound symbolic clusters.
An explanation for these results is that phonesthemes that are
proportionally large (i. e. where a certain meaning has a proportionally
large part of the (sound symbolic) roots of a cluster) are stored in such a
way that they are more accurately accessed by the language user.
However, all phonesthemes of the free production experimental results
above match the lexical analysis. A possible explanation for most of these
similarities could be that the phonesthemes of semantic features are
relatable to neurological connections between the senses (in accordance
with the model of 2.6.2).
The most successful phonesthemes (which were in fact not very
successful, cf. table 6.8) of the cross cultural interpretation experiment do
not reflect the frequent Swedish semantic feature 'pejorative'. An
explanation for the lack of success of this feature could be that the
negative emotion that 'pejorative' is based on is a cultural trait of
Swedish, but not of the other languages investigated here. However, of the
phonesthemes that did succeed, one of the clusters, fl-, is the
22Cf.
also table 4.8.
261
proportionally most sound symbolic cluster for 'quick or strong
movement', and the other two clusters skr- and tr- are the proportionally
the most sound symbolic clusters for the semantic features 'destruction'
and 'bad mood' respectively. These results are then in accordance with
Swedish competence. One obvious explanation for the overall bad results
is that non-native Swedes do not connect accurate expressions with the
semantic features as a natural consequence of different phonological
learning environments.23
The vowels were not taken into consideration in this table, since they
were studied in a different way, which involved contrasting some
meanings and sounds in minimal pairs.
The cross-linguistic comparisons concerning interjections and the
expressions for animal cries are not comparable to the data in table 8.3,
because they concern semantic fields other than the Swedish lexical study
and the experiments. The Thesaurus study, comparing English and
Swedish, showed that, for the concepts 'stupidity', 'rough surface
structure' and 'smooth surface structure', similar phonemes were used for
the last two concepts, but not for the first. A possible explanation for this
is that 'surface structure' is closer to a potentially simultaneous
phenomenon, namely sound imitation, since stroking different surfaces
give different sound effects. The comparison of different languages in the
studies of interjections showed certain agreements in vowels. Most of the
interjections consist of vowels and single consonants and are therefore not
comparable with sound symbolism of initial or final consonant clusters.
For the animal sounds, there were great expressive similarities between
the different languages. It was quite easy for listeners of different first
languages to correctly identify animals from the way in which their cries
were represented in different languages, cf. summary in 8.1.3.
Comparing these last two studies with the Thesaurus study (only involving
the related languages Swedish and English but showing great differences),
23However, as can be seen in table 6.9, subjects mostly guessed within the expected
semantic categories of the model. A potential explanation for these preferences has to
do with neurological connections between the senses, i. e. the parts of the model in
2.6.2 connected with innate predispositions.
262
the conclusion is that the expressions where there is a more direct (mainly
indexical or iconic) connection between expression and meaning are more
alike in different languages.
8.3 Possible explanations of onomatopoeia and
sound symbolism
Why is it that certain consonant clusters are connected with certain
meanings? And why is it that we want certain meanings to be expressed
sound symbolically, as well as with conventional morphemes; what is the
function of sound symbolic morphemes as compared with full
morphemes?
The first question is easy to answer when it concerns sound imitation. The
expressive side of words are articulated sounds and articulation can
imitate sounds, in a more or less conventionalized way. One possible
explanation to other sound symbolism is that phonesthemes were
originally onomatopoeic and later developed into metaphorically (e.g.
gn-: 'sound' and later also 'light') or metonymically (e.g. skv-: 'sound'
and later also 'wetness') related meanings (cf. 2.6.1). Underlying this are
the innate capacities for metaphor and metonymy. This is in accordance
with the theories of e.g. Herder (cf. 1.6.) about the origin of language.
This is not an impossible view since almost all initial consonant clusters
have the feature 'sound' or 'talking' (which later feature is a sub-category
of 'sound', cf. 4.2.3) to a greater or lesser extent. The only exceptions are
pj-, spj-, spl- and spr-.
There are some linguistic facts about Swedish and analyses of several
languages by various linguists that show along what lines other sound
symbolism in Swedish can partly be explained. A tendency is that lexically
infrequent clusters (i.e. marked clusters) are exploited sound symbolically
to a higher degree than lexically frequent clusters. It also seems as if a
large proportion of the three-consonant s-clusters are used for sound
symbolism in Swedish, cf. diagram 4.4. This is in accordance with the
discussion of Hinton, Nichols, Ohala (1994) about marked sounds being
used for sound symbolism. Also, sounds and sound combinations
263
otherwise non-existent in the language (wild
onomatopoeic and sound symbolic neologisms.
forms)
occur
in
Another aspect of markedness is that sounds that are new in a language
are often used sound symbolically (cf. Austerlitz, 1994, on ø in Finnish).
In Swedish, the latest great consonant change was the collapse of several
consonant clusters (e. g. skj-, stj-, sj-, kj-, tj-) into the fricatives S and
ç . A possible explanation is that the clusters containing j that were left
over – spj-, bj-, fj-, pj- – became more unusual and marked in Swedish
and therefore useful for sound symbolism.
Classifying the different meanings of sound symbolism, it is clear that
most of them fall under the perceptual category, but also under cognitive
factors, viz. evaluation, but not under a social category. This hints at
sound symbolism being in some way biologically grounded, rather than
learned.
Most of the meanings of the phonesthemes are relatable to the senses
(probably so because of metaphorical or metonymical extensions from
sound and/or neurological connections between the senses), apart from the
'pejoratives' and 'mental feeling'. Thus the phonesthemes are related to
hearing, seeing, touching, (but not to smelling, tasting)24. The semantic
features occurring over and over again are relatable to stable intermodal
connections, i.e. one sense is connected to another. There are, however,
many problems with an explanation in terms of synaesthesia (see 1.11.2).
Neurological aspects relevant for a model (see chapter 2) are neurological
connections between the senses, or a common ground for the senses.
Modalities that have especially strong connections (according to
Geschwind, 1965, according to Cytowic, 1989) are visual-auditory and
tactile-auditory.
Semantic features having to do with movements can ontogenetically be
explained in terms of metonymy, i.e., simultaneity in time and space
between sound and movement, and metaphor. In some cases
24 There also exist, on a lexical level, meaning extensions from sensory modalities to
mental phenomena (see Abelin, 1988).
264
proprioception might be involved, as in an explanation of pejoratives
where a feeling of disgust is experienced simultaneously with contractions
of certain facial muscles, which contractions have an effect on articulation
(cf. Darwin, "1965").
Ohala's (e.g. 1994) frequency code offers a solution for sound symbolism
of diminutives and augmentatives. The common factor is high-low
frequency for F0 (of intonation), noise or F2. High frequency is
connected to smallness, low frequency to largeness.
The second question – Why is it that we want certain meanings to be
expressed sound symbolically, as well as with conventional morphemes? –
can be answered with appeal to a kind of redundancy in the linguistic
sign. In language, there is partly a "triple articulation". The "third
articulation" is meaning bearing and motivated (cf. 1.2.5), and this makes
sound symbolic words very effective. There are, in sound symbolic
words, other ties between expression and meaning than merely the
arbitrary conventional ones, namely those that are motivated but still to
some extent conventional. We can still wonder if sound symbolism is a
remnant from earlier stages, where it could have had a high survival
value because of its connection with the senses and with things present at
the moment something is spoken. An argument for this is, for example,
Ohala's frequency code. Also, the connection between emotions and facial
contractions possibly resulting in certain sounds for pejoratives could also
be a remnant from earlier stages. On the other hand, it is possible, as
Jespersen claimed, that languages grow richer and richer in sound
symbolic words.
8.3.1 Pejoratives
The pejorative phonesthemes resist a simple explanation. Is there an
ugliness code? An ugliness metaphor? Or do they have to do with a basic
distinction between approval and disapproval? One of the 6 basic
emotions, according to e.g. Ekman (1973) is disgust, which is an emotion
underlying pejoratives.
265
Darwin (1872) gives a possible explanation for sound symbolic words
related to emotions, e.g. disgust (related to pejoratives) and interjections.
The explanation builds on the instinctive contractions of facial muscles
connected with a certain emotion. Pejoratives could be of a more
indexical nature, the result of interjections which in turn could be
conditioned by instinctive facial contractions. A similar type of word is
one that could be termed truly iconic. These are words like pluta, truta
and pussa, perhaps grina and a few more, where the pronunciation of the
vowel in particular can be seen as being dependent on the shape of the
face and sometimes connected to emotions.
Hamano (1994) proposes an explanation in child directed speech. He
studied palatalization in Japanese sound symbolism. Palatalization of
alveolar stops and fricatives is associated with "childishness" and
"immaturity". He connects this to studies on language acquisition
reporting palatalization as one of the universal characteristics of early
stages of children’s language acquisition. Palatalization is also reported as
one of the commonest devices of baby-talk, i.e., child directed speech
(Snow and Ferguson, 1977). Perhaps this is a way of explaining the
Swedish pejorative clusters bj-, fj-, pj-, which do not fit into a
synaesthetic and metaphoric pattern.
The high frequency of pejoratives in Swedish phonesthemes may well be a
cultural peculiarity, since it was not mirrored in the cross cultural
interpretation experiment. The pejorative could be based on a general
negative emotion, which could be favored in a certain social environment.
Naturally, further cross linguistic research is needed before any
conclusions can be drawn with respect to this.
8.3.2 Summary
To summarize:
1) The unique feature of phonesthemes in relation to ordinary morphemes
is that they are bound morphemes that are both meaning bearing and
motivated (cf. 1.2.5). Words with phonesthemes are very effective since
there are ties between expression and meaning other than merely the
266
arbitrary conventional, namely the motivated and to some extent the
conventional.
2a) Certain meanings are suitable to be conveyed symbolically in sound
e.g. meanings related to the senses because of the interaction between, on
the one hand, innate capacities based on neurological connections between
the senses and, on the other hand, learning in the present. The
neurological connections which (according to Geschwind, 1965,
according to Cytowic, 1989) are especially strong are the connections
visually-auditorily and tactile-auditorily. They make it possible for sound
imitative expressions and phonesthemes to lead to other sound symbolic
connections between these sound sequences and e.g. forms and movements
(which have to do with visual and/or tactile experience), and surface
structures and consistency (which have to do with tactile experience). The
learning process, of which a part is perceiving sounds and mimicking
them, in combination with conventionalization, causes the sound symbolic
expressions to vary (slightly) in different languages.
2b) The connection between the expression and meaning of pejoratives is
more difficult to relate to neurological connections between the senses and
can be given various explanations, connected with e. g. markedness, child
language or proprioception. The emotion of disgust might, however, be
behind the semantic feature 'pejorative'.
3) The result that final clusters predominantly end with a liquid or a
voiceless obstruent could perhaps be explained by the auditory salience in
the case of several voiceless obstruents; what is heard well is more useable
in general. It could be that such sounds are chosen for sound symbolism
since they could then fulfill functions other than merely the distinctive. It
is more difficult to give an explanation of the predominance of liquids
since this is a group based on both acoustic similarities and common
phonological patterning.
The usefulness of sound symbolism in general is connected with the
strong tie between meaning and expression, discussed in 3.3. It is
imaginable that peoples' reactions are quicker, stronger and more
267
accurate to sound symbolic expressions, and therefore they can be e.g.
more effective, more emotionally arousing, and more poetic.
8.4 Predictions for sound symbolism in Swedish
When a new non-arbitrary word is created or understood it is most likely
to have the following characteristics:
1. Its semantic content belongs to those described in chapter 4 (except for
'light') and 525.
Sound:
Movement:
Light:
Surface structure:
Consistency:
(Plasticity)
Wetness:
Sound
Talking
Beat
Movement
Quick or strong movement
Walking
Falling
Potential movement
Quickness
Light
Gaze
Rough surface structure
Smooth surface structure
Soft consistency
Hardness
Slackness
Stiffness
Wetness
Adhesion
25The order of presentation follows the order in 2.6 and 4.2.3, which is based on the
preliminary lexical frequencies of this study. After the lexical study of initial clusters
was completed the order of the semantic features was somewhat changed, but the
original order was kept in some lists. It therefore does not represent an analytical order.
For the order of frequency of the completed lexical study of initial clusters, see diagram
4.5.
268
Dryness:
Attitude:
Slang:
Jocular:
Pejorative:
Mental feeling:
Bodily feeling:
Separation:
Putting together:
Diminutive:
Augmentative:
Form:
Iterative:
Dryness
Attitude
Secrecy
Slang
Jocular
Pejorative
Destruction
Mental feeling
Bad mood
Bodily feeling
Suffocation
Separation
Putting together
Diminutive
Augmentative
Form
Round form
Short-wide form
Thin form
Hollow form
Winding form
Long thin form
Narrow form
Small end form
Bent form
Iterative
Fine grain
2. Its initial and final consonant cluster is one that is appropriate for its
semantic content, see chapters 4 (except for 'light') and 5. The most sound
symbolic initial clusters in absolute numbers and percentally, for the five
most frequent meanings, are shown in table 8.4.
Table 8.4 The most sound symbolic initial clusters in absolute numbers
and percentally, for the five most frequent meanings.
269
meaning
'pejorativ
e'
'sound'
'long thin
form'
'quick or
strong
movement
'
'wetness'
in
freq.
sl-
freq.
%
in %
%
freq.
24
16
pj-
71
5
kl-,
knsp-
15
fn-
33
3
23
13,
19
17
spj-
33
2
fl-
18
19
fl-
19
18
sl-
12
8
skv-
40
4
The most frequent semantic features for final clusters according to NFO 4
are shown in table 8.5. Clusters and cluster frequencies are shown to the
right (cf. tables 5.4, 5.18 and 5.19).
Table 8.5 The most frequent semantic features for final clusters according
to NFO 4.
meaning
'quick or
strong
movement'
'talking'
'sound'
'pejorative'
'wetness'
'long thin
form'
in
freq.
Nl
freq.
in %
%
4
Nl,
tr, bl
5, 4
st, sl,
lr, tr
fs,
sk,
ms
sk
Nk,
lk
5 ,4,
4, 4
10,
5, 4
dr,
lr
dr,
bl
lr, sl
40,
25,
22
25,
24
44,
27
59,
27,
25
-
8
7, 4
fs,
ms,
dr
-
270
8.5 Main objective and further research
The main objective of this thesis is the description of Swedish
phonesthemes, which can constitute a basis for further research in this
area.
Another important result is the insight that sound symbolism is not an
issue of whether or not phonesthemes exist. Instead, sound symbolism is
present in consonant clusters in varying degrees. Some clusters are more
sound symbolic than others while some meanings are more frequent than
others. Some phonesthemes are more easily interpretable than others.
Some phonesthemes are more productive than others and in slightly
varying ways for different speakers. It is obvious that sound symbolic
categories in Swedish show a conceptual organization that is compatible
with both innate categories of thinking, such as similarity and contiguity,
and with learning, in connection with sense impressions and emotion.
An interesting continuation of this investigation is to study the effect of
context on the interpretation of phonesthemes, e.g. in experiments with
neologisms in different sentence contexts.
Special spoken corpora would also be interesting to study, in search of
neologisms (in context), e.g. corpora of child and adolescent language.
It would also be interesting to study the stability of (the most common)
phonesthemes over time, e.g. by analysis of "dead" words in the SAOB
(Svenska Akademiens ordlista över svenska språket).
Yet another interesting continuation would be to study the dispersion of
(the most common) phonesthemes in dialect lexica.
And, of course, it would be very interesting to expand the cross-linguistic
comparisons to more semantic fields and to more languages.
It is also very tempting to refresh e.g. the experiments of chapter 6 and
the lexical decision experiment (Abelin, 1996) with auditive stimuli, with
the aid of reaction time programs which were not available at the time
271
when I initiated the experimentation. Naturally, the context effect should
also be studied in this way. Connected with this is the aim to construct a
psycholinguistic model for online processing for the perception and
production of sound symbolic words.
272
Bibliography
Abelin, Å., Allwood, J. (1984) Tolkning av känsloprosodi - en kontrastiv studie,
unpubl. paper, Göteborg University, Department of Linguistics.
Abelin, Å. (1988) 'Patterns of synaesthesia in the Swedish vocabulary,' in Studies in
Computer-Aided lexicology, Almqvist & Wiksell Int. Stockholm
Abelin, Å. (1996) 'A lexical decision experiment with onomatopoeic, sound symbolic
and arbitrary words', in TMH-QPSR 2/1996. Stockholm
Adams, D., Lloyd, J. (1983) The meaning of Liff, Pan Books and Faber & Faber.
London
Allén, S., Eeg-Olofson, M., Gavare, R., Sjögreen, C. (1981) Svensk baklängesordbok,
Esselte Studium. Stockholm
Allén, S., Berg, S., Järborg, J., Löfström, J., Ralph, B., Sjögreen, C. (1980)
Nusvensk frekvensordbok 4, Almqvist & Wiksell International. Stockholm
Allott, R. (1973) The physical foundation of language, ELB Printers. Seaford Sussex
Allwood, J. (1983) Om distinktionerna mellan semantik och pragmatik, Gothenburg
papers in theoretical linguistics S3, Göteborg University, Department of Linguistics
Allwood, J. (1983) 'Kan man tänka oberoende av språk' in U. Teleman (ed.) Tal och
tanke, Liber förlag. Lund
Allwood, J. (1985) 'Tvärkulturell kommunikation', in Papers in anthropological
linguistics 12, Göteborg University, Department of Linguistics, pp. 9-61
Allwood, J. (1989) Om begrepp – deras bestämning, analys och konstruktion (ms).
Allwood, J., Andersson, L-G.(1976) Semantik. (Semantics). GULING 1. Göteborg
University, Department of Linguistics
Austerlitz, R. (1994) 'Finnish and Gilyak sound symbolism – an interplay between
system and history'. in L. Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds) Sound symbolism,
Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, pp. 249-260
Bentley, M., Varon, E. (1933) An accessory study of phonetic symbolism Amer. J.
Psychol. 45, 76-86
Bloomfield, L. (1933) Language, Henry Holt. New York
Bolinger, D. (1968) Aspects of language, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. New York
Bolinger, D. (1950), Rime, assonance and morpheme analysis, Word 6: 117-136
Bolinger, D. (1965) Forms of English: Accent, morpheme, order, Hokuou Publishing
Company. Tokyo
Bring, S. C. (1930) Svenskt ordförråd, Natur och Kultur. Stockholm
Brown, R. W. (1958) Words and things, The Free Press. New York
273
Bühler, K. (1969) "L'onomatopée et la fonction représentative du langage", in Essais sur
le langage. J.-P. Pariente (ed.) Les Editions de Minuit. Paris (Partial translation of work
originally published 1933 as Sprachtheorie ) Fisher. Jena
Chastaing, M. (1958) "Le symbolisme de voyelles: significations des "i" I& II", Journal
de Psychologie 55, 403-423 & 461-481
Chastaing, M. (1965) "Pop - fop - pof - fof", Vie et Langage 159, 311-317
Chastaing, M. (1966) "Si les r étaient des l", (Part 1) Vie et langage 173, 468-472; (Part
2) 174, 502-507
Childs, G.T. (1994) 'African ideophones'. in L. Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds.)
Sound symbolism, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, pp. 178-204
Clark, H., Clark, E. (1977) Psychology and language, An introduction to
psycholinguistics, Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. New York
Cytowic, (1989) Synaesthesia - a union of the senses, Springer Verlag. New York
Darwin, C. (1872) The expression of emotion in man and animals, John Murray. London
Davis, R. (1961) The fitness of names to drawings: A cross-cultural study in
Tanganyika, Brit. J. Psychol. 52, 259-268
Diffloth, G. (1976) 'Expressives in Semai', Oceanic linguistics special publication no.
13: Austroasiatic Studies I, Honolulu
Diffloth, G., (1994) 'i:big, a:small', in L. Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds) Sound
symbolism, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge
Ekman, P. (1973) 'Cross-cultural studies of facial expressions' in P. Ekman (ed.)
Darwin and facial expression , Academic Press. New York (pp. 169-222)
Fano, G. (1962) Saggio sulle origine del linguaggio. Con una storia critica della dottrine
glottogoniche, Guilin Einaudi Editore. Torino
Fónagy, I. (1963) Die metaphern in der phonetik. The Hague
Freud, S. (1891) On aphasia, a critical study, International Univ. Press. New York
Gabelentz, G. v. d. (1891) Die Sprachwissenschaft, ihre Aufgaben, Methoden und
bisherigen Ergebnisse. Leibzig
Garlén, C. (1988) Svenskans fonologi: i kontrastiv och typologisk belysning,
Studentlitteratur. Lund
Garman, M. (1990) Psycholinguistics, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge
Grammont, M. (1933) Traité de phonétique. Paris
Hamano, S. (1994) 'Palatalization in Japanese sound symbolism', in L. Hinton, J .
Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds) Sound symbolism, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge,
pp. 148-157
Hellquist, E. (1966) Svensk etymologisk ordbok I-II. Gleerup. Lund
274
Herder, J. G. (1772/1969) Essay on the origin of speech in P.H. Salus (ed.) On
language: Plato to von Humboldt, Holt, Rinehart and Winston. New York, pp.147-166
Hewes, G. W. (1977) 'Language origin Theories' in D. M. Rumbaugh (ed) Language
Learning by a Chimpanzee, New York Academic Press. New York
Hinton, L. (1986) 'Musical diffusion and linguistic diffusion'. in C. Frisbee (ed)
Anthropology and Music: Essays in Honor of David P. McAllester. Detroit Monographs
in Musicology 9. Detroit. Information Coordinators
Hinton, L., Nichols, J., Ohala, J.J., (1994) 'Introduction: Sound symbolic processes',
in L. Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds) Sound symbolism, Cambridge University
Press. Cambridge, pp. 1-12
Holland, M. K., Wertheimer, M. (1964) 'Some physiognomic aspects of naming, or,
maluma and takete revisited', Percept. Mot. Skills 19, 111-117
Householder, F.W. (1946) On the problem of sound and meaning, An English
phonestheme (discussion in Language 23 feb 1946)
Humboldt W. v. (1836/1907) Über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues
und ihren Einfluss auf die geistige Entwicklung des Menschengeschlechts. Gesammelte
Schriften, Vol. VII, Part 1. Königlich--Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Berlin
Hörmann, H. (1979) Psycholinguistics: an introduction to research and theory, SpringerVerlag. New York
Ideforss, H. (1928) De primära interjektionerna i nysvenskan, 1, Primära impulsioner
och imperationer, Carl Bloms boktryckeri. Lund
Jacobsen Jr., W. H. (1994) 'Nootkan vocative vocalism and its implications' in L.
Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds) Sound symbolism, Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge, pp. 23-39
Jakobson, R., Fant, G., Halle, M. (1957) Preliminaries to speech analysis, the
distinctive features and their acoustic correlates, M.I.T. Press. Cambridge, Mass.
Jakobson, R., Waugh, L. (1979) The sound shape of language, Harvester Press, Sussex
Jespersen, O. (1918) "Nogle men-ord", studier tillegnade Esaias Tegner, Lund
Jespersen, O. (1922 a) Language - its nature, development and origin, Allen and Unwin.
London
Jespersen, O. (1922 b) "Lydsymbolik", Nordisk tidskrift för vetenskap, konst och
industri (II), Stockholm
Jesperssen, O. (1933) "Symbolic value of the vowel i" [1922] in Linguistica, College
Park. Maryland
Jo'hannesson, A. (1949) Origin of language: four essays, Reykjavík, H.F. Leiftur,
Blackwell. Oxford
Katz, J.J., Postal, F. (1964) An integrated theory of linguistic descriptions, M.I.T.
Press. Cambridge, Mass.
Kotsinas, U. (1994) Ungdomsspråk, Hallgren & Fallgren. Uppsala
275
Kukkonen, P. (1989) Från konst till vetenskap, PhD Thesis, Helsingfors university
Källström, R. (1988) Morfologi, GULING 9, Göteborg University, Department of
Linguistics.
Köhler W. (1930) Gestalt psychology, Bell and Sons Ltd. London
Lakoff, G., Johnsson, M. (1980) Metaphors we live by, The University of Chicago
Press. Chicago and London
Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the
mind, University of Chicago Press. Chicago
Lapolla, R.J, (1994) 'An experimental investigation into phonetic symbolism as it relates
to Mandarin Chinese' in L. Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds.) Sound symbolism,
Cambridge University Press. Cambridge
Leech, G. N. (1969) Towards a semantic description of English, Longman. London
Lehrer, A. (1974) Semantic fields and lexical structure, North-Holland. Amsterdam,
London
Lindblad, P. (1992) Rösten, Studentlitteratur. Lund
Luria, A. (1977) Mannen med det obegränsade minnet, Wahlström & Widstrand.
Stockholm
Lyons, J. (1977) Semantics I-II, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge
Malkiel, Y. (1978) 'From phonosymbolism to morphosymbolism', Fourth LACUS
Forum, Columbia, S.C.
Malkiel, Y. (1994) 'Regular sound development, phonosymbolic orchestration,
disambiguation of homonyms' in L. Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds) Sound
symbolism, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge
Malmgren, S-G, (1988) 'On regular polysemy in Swedish' in Studies in Computer-Aided
Lexicology, Almqvist & Wiksell International. Stockholm
Markell, N.N. & Hamp, E.P. (1960) "Connotative meanings of certain phoneme
Sequences", Studies in linguistics 15, pp. 47-61
Marks L.E. (1990) Synaesthesia: perception and metaphor in F. Burwick & W. Pape
(eds) Aesthetic Illusion: theoretical and historical approaches, Berlin New York, W. de
Gruyter
Massaro, D. W., Tsuzaki, M., Cohen, M. M:, Gesi, A., & Heredia, R. (1993),
'Bimodal speech perception : An examination across languages'. in Journal of Phonetics,
21
Meillet, A. (1931) Review of Wahlgren, 1930 Bulletin de la Société de linguistique de
Paris 31 (2): 113-114
Miller, G. A., Johnsson-Laird, P.N. (1976) Language and perception, Harward
University Press. Cambridge, Mass.
Müller, A. L., (1960) Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur stimmlichen Darstellung von
Gefühlen, Dissertation. Göttingen
276
Müller, M.F. (1861/1961) Three lectures on the science of language and its place in
general education, repr. Indological Book House. Benares
Nerman, T. (1954) Troll i ord, inrim och uddrim i svensk vers, Tidens förlag. Stockholm
Newman, S. (1933) Further experiments in phonetic symbolism, American Journal of
Psychology 45, 53-75
Nordberg, B. (1986) 'The use of onomatopoeia in the conversational style of
adolescents', FUMS rapport nr 132, Uppsala University. FUMS. Uppsala
Ohala, J. J., (1994) The frequency code underlies the sound-symbolic use of voice pitch,
in L. Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds.) Sound symbolism, Cambridge University
Press. Cambridge
Osgood, C. E. (1962 a) Psycholinguistic relativity and universality, Proc. 16th Int.
Congr. Psychol. (Bonn 1960) North-Holland. Amsterdam
Osgood, C. E. (1962 b) Studies on the generality of affective meaning systems, Amer.
Psychologist 17, 10-28
Osgood, C. E., G. J. Suci, and P. H. Tannenbaum (1957) The measurment of meaning,
University of Illinois Press. Urbana, Illinois
Oswalt, R. L. (1994) 'Inanimate imitatives in English', in L. Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J.
Ohala (eds.) Sound symbolism, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, pp. 293-306
The Oxford dictionary of English etymology (1967), ed. by C. T. Onions, University
press. Oxford
Paget, R. (1930) Human Speech, Harcourt, Brace. New York
Peirce, C.S. (1955) 'Logic as semiotic: The theory of signs', in Buchler, J. (ed)
Philosophical writings of Peirce Dover. New York
Peterfalvi, J.-M. (1965) 'Les recherches expérimentales sur le symbolisme phonétique',
American Journal of Psychology 65, 439-473
Plato (c. 428-348 B.C.) Cratylos dialogue (1962) Loeb Classical Library. Harward
University Press. Cambridge
Porzig, W. (1934/1973) 'Wesenhafte Bedeutungsbeziehungen'. Wortfeldsforschung
1973. 78-103
Révész, G. (1946) Ursprung und Vorgeschichte der Sprache, A. Francke. Bern
Rhodes, R. (1994) 'Aural images', in L. Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds.) Sound
symbolism, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, pp. 276-292
Roget's thesaurus of English words
Harmondsworth. Middlesex
and phrases (1977) Penguin Books.
Rousseau, J.-J. (1822/1969) Essay on the origin of languages in P.H. Salus (ed.) On
Language: Plato to von Humboldt, Holt, Rinehart and Winston. New York, pp. 138-146
Samarin, W. (1978) 'Linguistic adaptation to speech function', in W. Mc Cormack, S.A.
Wurm (eds) Approaches to language: Anthropological issues, Mouton. The Hague
277
Sapir, E. (1921) Language, Harcourt Brace. New York
Sapir, E. (1929) 'A study in phonetic symbolism', in D. Mandelbaum (ed.) Selected
writings, Berkeley. California
Saussure, F. de (1916/1983) Course in general linguistics, Duckworth. London
Sereno J. A. (1994) 'Phonosyntactics', in L. Hinton, J. Nichols, J.J. Ohala (eds) Sound
symbolism, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge
Sigurd, B. (1965) Phonotactic sructures in Swedish, Berlingska boktryckeriet. Lund
Sigurd, B. (1993) 'Att tillverka varumärken', Språkvård 3, Svenska språknämnden.
Stockholm, pp. 9-14
Snow, C.E., Ferguson, C.A., (eds), (1977) Talking to Children: Language Input and
Acquisition, Cambridge University Press. New York
Stenström, C. (1984) Svenskans initiala konsonantkluster - en frekvensstudie, Unpubl.
paper, Dept. of linguistics. Göteborg University, Department of Linguistics.
Süssmilch, J.P. (1767), Versuch eines Beweises, dass die erste Sprache ihren Ursprung
nicht vom Menschen, sondern allein vom Schöpfer erhalten habe, Akad. Vorl. Berlin
Svensk Ordbok (1986) Esselte Studium. Stockholm
Svenska Akademiens ordlista över svenska språket (1974) 10 uppl., P.A. Norstedt &
Söner förlag. Stockholm
Svenska Akademiens ordlista över svenska språket (1998) 12 uppl., Norstedts.
Stockholm
Ordbok över svenska språket, utgiven av Svenska Akademien (SAOB) (1926),
Lindstedts universitetsbokhandel. Lund
Thorndike, E. L. (1943) Man and his works, Harvard University Press. Cambridge,
Mass.
Thun, N. (1963) Reduplicative words in English: a study of formations of the types ticktock, hurly-burly, and shilly-shally. PhD Thesis, Stockholm University
Traunmüller, H. (1996) 'Sound symbolism in deictic words', TMH-QPSR 2/1996.
Stockholm
Trier, J. (1934) Das sprachliche Feld, Neue Jahrbucher fur Wissenschaft und
Jugendbildung 10, 428-449
Tsuru, S., Fries, H. S. (1933) 'A problem in meaning', Journal of Gen. Psychology 8,
281-284
Ullman, S. (1972) Semantics An introduction to the science of meaning, Blackwell.
Oxford
Ultan, R. (1978) 'Size-sound symbolism', in J. Greenberg (ed) Universals of human
language 2,
278
Usnadze, D. (1924) 'Ein experimenteller Beitrag zum problem der psychologischen
Grundlagen der Namengebung', Psychologische Forschung 5, 24-43.
Werner, H. (1953/1957) Comparative psychology of mental development, International
Universities Press. New York
Werner, H., Kaplan, B. (1963) Symbol formation, Wiley. New York
Wescott, R. (1975) 'Allolinguistics: exploring the peripheries of speech', in P. Reich
(ed),The Second LACUS Forum, The Hornbeam Press, Columbia, South Carolina, 497513
Wescott, R. (1978) 'Lexical polygenesis: Words as resultants of multiple linguistic
pressures' in Semantics and Lexicology
Whorf, B. L. (1956/1967) Language, thought and reality: selected writings, ed J.B.
Carroll (ed), The MIT paperback series 5, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Viberg, Å. (1984) 'The verbs of perception: a typological study', Linguistics, 21, 1.
Viberg, Å. (1993) 'Crosslinguistic perspectives on lexical organization and lexical
progression' in K. Hyltenstam & Å. Viberg (eds), Progression and Regression in
language, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, pp. 340-385
Wilde, K. (1958) 'Naive und kunstlerische Formen des graphischen Ausdrucks', Ber.
21. Kongr. Dtsch. Ges. Psychol., Göttingen: Verlag fur Psychologie, Bonn, pp. 157159
Wisseman, H. (1954) Untersuchungen zur
sprachpsychologischen Versuche, Winter. Heidelberg
279
Onomatopoie,
Part
I:
Die
From SOB
Word:
bjäbba
bjäfs
bjällra
bjärt
bjässe
Key words,SOB
uppnosigt prat
överdriven
klingande
lysande
mycket stor
Category
pejorative, talking
pejorative
sound
light
augmentative
black
bladdra
blaffa
blaj
blank
blarr
blaska
blek
blemma
blick
bliga
blind
blinka
blixt
block
blod
blond
blossa
bluddra
blunda
blunder
blåsa
bläck
bläddra
blända
blänga
blänka
bläs
blöt
ljus, färg
prata strunt
större fläck
mindr tilltalan
meningslöst prat
glansig yta
struntprat
röra i vatten plaska dålig
färg
blåsa
seende
titta envetet, dumt, fånstirra
se
ögonen
ljus
massivt stycke
vätska
ljus färg
brinna, låga
struntprat
ögonen
misstag
rundad
vätska färgad
blemma, blåsa
ljus
betrakta
ljus
ljus strimma
vatten
light
pejorative, talking
pejorative
pejorative, talking
light
pejorative, talking
pejorative, wetness
light
round form
gaze
pejorative, gaze
gaze
gaze
light
shortwide form
wetness
light
light
pejorative, talking
gaze
pejorative
round form
wetness
round form
light
gaze
light
light
wetness
braka
brassa
brista
brum
brus
bryta
bråte
bräck
bräka
bränning
bröl
ljud
skjuta , stora krafter
sönder
ljud
ljud
kraftig, spricka
förbrukat, oanvändbart
krosskada
ljud
splitras
ljud
sound
sound
destruction
sound
sound
destruction
destruction
destruction
sound
destruction
sound
Appendix 1
Sida 1
drasut
dratta
dravel
dregel
dribbla
drill
droppa
drulle
drummel
dråsa
drägg
drälla
drämma
dröse
drösa
nedsättande
slarv, fumlig
struntprat
saliv, oavsiktligt
rörelser
ton
falla
ohyfsat, vårdslöst
klumpigt, vårdslöst
falla klumpigt
botten, slödder
planlöst, vårdslöst, förflytta
slå hårt
osorterad, ostrukturerad mängd
falla, tätt, okontrollerat
pejorative
falling, pejorative
talking, pejorative
wetness, pejorative
movement
sound
falling, wetness
pejorative
pejorative
falling
pejorative
falling, pejorative
beat
pejorative
falling
fjant
fjolla
fjompig
fjuttig
fjärta
fjäsa
fjäsk
åtlöje
saknar stadga i karaktär
löjlig
futtig, torftig
ljud, ofrivilligt
göra sig till
överdriven
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative
sound
pejorative
pejorative
flabb
flacka
fladdra
flaga
flagga
flak
flamma
flamsa
flanera
flarn
flaxa
flimra
flina
flinga
flink
flisa
flitter
flopp
floskel
fluffa
fluga
flukta
fluktuation
flummig
flyga
fly
skratt
planlöst fara
rörelse
tunt stycke
vifta
flat form, större stycke
stark eld, orolig, plötslig
bullersam, tröttsamt, vårdslöst, stojigt
vandra utan bestämt mål
bräckligt stycke poröst
slå häftigt, flygande
dallrande ljus
mindre vackert, försmädligt
litet lätt tunt stycke
snabbt
litet tunt vasst stycke
oäkta, värdelös
snöplig, misslyckande
högtravande intetsäg. löjlig
lätt luftig ruska
flygande
kasta snabb blick
ständigt stigande och fallande
intellektuellt oredig
förflytta sig
hastigt lämna
sound, pejorative
q or s movement, pejorative
q or s movement
thin form
q or s movement
thin form
light, q or s movement
pejorative
q or s movement
thin form
q or s movement
q or s movement, light
pejorative
thin form
quickness
thin form
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative
airy consistency
q or s movement
gaze
q or s movement
pejorative
q or s movement
q or s movement
Appendix 1
Sida 2
flyta
flytta
flåsa
fläkta
flämta
flänga
flöda
flöjel
flöjt
transporteras
till annan plats
tungt snabbt
blåsa
snabbt häftigt
rusa framochtillbaka hetsigt
rinna stor mängd
vindriktning lätt skiva
ton luftström skarp kant
q or s movement
q or s movement
q or s movement
q or s movement
q or s movement
q or s movement
q or s movement
thin form
sound
fnasig
fnask
fnatta
fnissa
fnittra
fnoskig
fnurra
fnysa
fnöske
fjälla
nedsättande
springa planlöst
skratta
skratta
tokig
osams
häftigt ljudligt förakt
porös
thin form
pejorative
q or s movement, pejorative
sound
sound
pejorative
pejorative
sound
dryness
fradga
frasa
frat
frossa
frotté
frusa
frusta
fryna
fräsa
fräta
skummande
ljud
söndergnagt skräp
skakning köldkänslor
poröst
häftigt välla fram
ljud
rynka
ljud
upplösa
wetness
sound
destruction
q or s movement
rough surface structure
q or s movement
sound
rough surface structure
sound
destruction
glacé
glací
glaciär
glam
glana
glans
glas
glatt
glaubersalt
glaukom
gli
glida
glimma
glimmer
glimra
glimt
glinder
glindra
glipa
glänsande
jämn yta
is
högljudd
stirra
jämnt sken blank yta
glänsande
slät blank hal
glas
syn
litet
jämnt
lysa svagt skiftande
glänsande
lysa svagt skiftande
blänk ljus
glänsande
glimra
smalt
light
smooth surface str
smooth surface str
sound
gaze
light
smooth surface str
smooth surface str
smooth surface str
gaze
diminutive
smooth surface str
light
light
light
light
light
light
form, diminutive
Appendix 1
Sida 3
glisa
glissando
glittra
glo
glob
glop
glopp
gloria
glosögd
glosa
glufsa
glugg
glunkas
glupa
glupsk
glutta
glytt
glåmig
glåpord
gläfs
glänsa
glänta
glöd
lysa
glida ton
lysa starkt snabbt
stirra dumt
klotformig
slyngel
snö regn
ljus
ögon
glo
mycket ovårdat
liten
sägas skvaller
glupskt
nedsätt
titta
barnunge
blek
förolämpande yttrande
svagt hundskall
sken blank
mindre öppen
sken
light
sound, smooth surface
light
gaze
form
pejorative
wetness
light
gaze
gaze
pejorative
form, diminutive
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative
gaze
diminutive
light
pejorative
sound
light
form, diminutive
light
gnabb
gnat
gneta
gnida
gnidare
gnissla
gnista
gnistra
gno
gnoding
gnola
gnugga
gnutta
gny
gnägga
gnälla
gnöla
smågräl
småaktig upprepad
småsaker, oväsentlig, snål
upprepade rörelser
snål
ljud
brinnande glödande
korta starka ljusglimtar
små snabba rörelser
knorrhane
sjunga
små korta rörelser
mycket liten
ljud
kraftigt läte
läte
klaga
talking
talking, pejorative
pejorative
smooth surface str, q or s mo
pejorative
sound
light
light
smooth surface str, q or s mo
sound
talking
smooth surface str, q or s mo
diminutive
talking
sound
sound
talking
gramse
grav
grift
groll
grop
grotta
grubba
grubbla
arg irriterad
grävd hålighet i marken
grav
ovänskap
djup hålighet
håltum
grop
dyster
bad mood
hollow form
hollow form
bad mood
hollow form
hollow form
hollow form
bad mood
Appendix 1
Sida 4
gruff
grumlig
grummel
grums
grumsa
grunka
grym
grymta
gryt
gråta
gräla
gräll
gräma
gräslig
gräva
gröpa
gräl
ogenomskinlig oönskad
grums
oönskad
klagomål
föremål vard
samvetslöst tillfogar lidande
ljud
jordhåla
röst
högljudd respektlös diskussion
syn alltför starkt
oönskad
stark olust
djupare grop
gräva mindre hål
bad mood, talking
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative, talking
slang
bad mood
talking
hollow form
talking
bad mood, talking
light, pejorative
pejorative
pejorative
hollow form
hollow form
klabb
klabb
klack
kladd
klafs
klaga
klamp
klamp
klamra
klandra
klang
klanka
klanta
klappa
klappra
klatsch
klena
kleta
klibba
klick
klick
klifs
klimp
kling
klink
klirra
klister
klocka
kloss
klot
klotter
klubba
klucka
kort tjockt stycke
blöt
utskjutande, del
blöt vidhäftande
ljud våt klibbig
framföra missnöje
grovt stycke
ljud
gripa
ogillande yttra
toner
upprepat förebrå småaktigt
dum klumpig
upprepat slå
ljud
ljud
kladdig
blöt vidhäftande
kladdig
klump smetig
ljud
ljud blött
mindre stycke
ljud
spel
ljud
klibbig
klang
grovt stycke
runt
slarvig
kloss
ljud
shortwide form
wetness
shortwide form
wetness
sound, wetness
talking
shortwide form
sound
adhesion
talking
sound
talking, pejorative
pejorative
sound
sound
sound
wetness
wetness, adhesion
wetness, adhesion
wetness, shortwide form
sound
sound, wetness
shortwide form
sound
sound
sound
adhesion
sound
shortwide form
shortwide form
pejorative
shortwide form
sound, wetness
Appendix 1
Sida 5
kludda
klump
klunk
kluns
klåpa
klämta
klänga
kläpp
klätt
klättra
dålig slarvig
oformligt större stycke
vätska
klumpig
dålig slarvig
ringa
hålla kvar
ljud, klump
liten topp
fästpunkt
pejorative
shortwide form
wetness
pejorative
pejorative
sound
adhesion
sound, shortwide form
shortwide form
adhesion
knacka
knackig
knagg
knaggla
knaka
knal
knall
knalla
knalle
knapp
knapra
knarr
knarrig
knasig
knast
knastra
knata
knatte
knatter
kneg
kneken
knick
knipa
knippa
knipsa
knirka
knirra
knistra
knittra
knixa
knocka
knodd
knoga
knoge
knollra
knop
knopp
knorr
knorr
upprepade slag lystring
dålig
pinne
röra sig
ljud
svag knapp
ljud
gå långsamt vard
liten rund höjd
skiva, kula
knastrande
ljud
vresig
tokigt dum
utväxt
ljud
springa vard
liten
ljud
nedsättande
förfallet
tvär böj
ihop
hophållna
nypa
ljud
ljud
ljud
ljud
liten hastig
slå
nedsättande
mödosamt gå
upphöjning
smålockig
knut
liten kula
liten vriden form
muttrande kurrande
sound
pejorative
round form
walking
sound
pejorative
sound
walking
round form
round form
sound
sound
bad mood
pejorative
round form
sound
walking
diminutive
sound
pejorative
pejorative
round form
putting together
putting together
putting together
sound
sound
sound
sound
q or s movement
beat
pejorative
walking
round form
round form
round form
round form
round form
sound
Appendix 1
Sida 6
knorva
knot
knota
knota
knott
knottra
knubbig
knuff
knut
knutte
knyck
knyckla
knyppla
knyst
knyta
knåp
knäck
knäppa
knödel
knöl
knöl
knös
veckig rynkig
knorrhane
muttrande klaga
förtjockad
liten mygga
liten upphöjning
kort tjock
stöt
sammanfogning
nedsätt
plötslig rörelse
ihop
flätas
ljud
samman
smått obetydligt
brott slag
ljud
bulle
mindre rundad
otrevlig
nedsätt
pejorative
sound
talking
round form
diminutive
round form
round form
beat
putting together
pejorative
q or s movement
putting together
putting together
sound
putting together
diminutive
beat
sound
round form
round form
pejorative
pejorative
krabat
kracka
krackelera
krafs
krafsa
krake
krakel
krakmandel
kram
kram
krams
krans
kras
krasch
kratsa
kratta
kratta
kravla
kraxa
kreta
krimskrams
kringelikrokar
kringla
krock
krok
krokan
krokett
litet
sönderdela
fina sprickor
värdelösa småsaker
ljud
beklagansvärd
högljutt
tunt bräckligt skal
värdelösa
våt
värdelösa småsaker
ring sammanflätad
ljud
ljud
rörelse
fåra
dålig
mödosam förflytta
ljud
karva dålig
värdelösa småsaker
mängd krökar
form av en båge
häftig sammanstötning
långsmalt halvcirkel
krusiduller, snirklig
frasig
diminutive
destruction
destruction
pejorative
sound
pejorative
sound
thin form
pejorative
wetness
pejorative
winding form
sound
sound
q or s movement
rough surface structure
pejorative
walking
sound
pejorative
pejorative
winding form
winding form
beat
winding form
winding form
thin form
Appendix 1
Sida 7
krossa
kruka
krulla
krum
krumbukt
krumelur
krumpen
krusa
kruserlig
krusiduller
krusta
krustad
krycka
krylla
krypa
krysta
kråka
kråma
krångel
krås
kräk
kräkla
kräla
kräm
krämta
kränga
kräpp
krök
sönder
cylindrisk bukig
små lockar
böjd
kraftfull slingrande rörelse
krokig linje
böjd
full av små vågor
tillgjord
form slingrande linjer
skal
bakverk i form av bägare
böjt
rörlig
förflytta sig
samtal, formulering
fågel
stolt vrida
besvärligt
veckad remsa
klandervärd
inrullat krön
förflytta sig slingrande
tjockflytande
harkla
vickande rörelser
tunt krusig yta
kraftig sväng
destruction
round form
winding form
winding form
winding form
winding form
winding form
winding form
pejorative
winding form
thin form
thin form
winding form
walking
walking
sound
sound
winding form
pejorative
rough surface str
pejorative
winding form
walking, winding form
wetness
sound
q or s movement
rough surface str
winding form
kvacka
kvadda
kval
kvalm
kvarka
kvarn
kvav
kverulans
kvick
kvida
kvillra
kvirra
kvissla
kvist
kvitter
kväda
kväka
kvälja
kväva
läte
förstöra
lidande
osund äckel
nedbrytande
kvalmig kväva
klaga
små snabba rörelser
ljud
ljud
kverulera
liten blåsa
liten smal
läte
sjunga
läte
lukt äckla
svårighet att andas
sound
destruction
bodily feeling
bodily feeling
sound
destruction
bodily feeling
talking
q or s movement
sound
sound
sound
diminutive
diminutive
sound
sound
sound
bodily feeling
bodily feeling
mjau
läte
sound
Appendix 1
Sida 8
mjuk
mjäkig
mjäla
mjäll
mjäll
mjöl
angenäm känsel jämn slät
alltför vek
mjölfin
fin konsistens
fjäll
finmald
soft consistency
pejorative
fine grain
soft consistency
fine grain
fine grain
njugg
onödigt snål
pejorative
pjatt
pjoller
pjosk
pjunk
pjåkig
obetydlig hållningslös
meningslöst prat
överdriven
gnäll veklighet
dålig
pejorative
pejorative, talking
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative
pladask
pladder
pladuska
planka
plask
platt
pligg
pling
plint
plira
plissé
plit
ploj
plomb
plottra
plufsig
plugg
plump
plump
plums
plundra
plunta
pluring
plurr
plussig
plutt
plym
plymå
plysa
plysch
plätt
plös
klumpigt ljudligt fall
oavbrutet innehållslöst prat
stor utbredning oönskad
fyrsidigt stycke
häftigt vatten ljud
ytor
kort spetsigt stift
ljud
lådformigt avsmalnande
titta halvt tillslutna
regelbunden fin veckning
starkt vard.
skämtsamt spratt
bly, fyllning
spridda oväsentliga smådetaljer
slappt fet
litet cylindriskt
fläck
grov ohyfsad
ljud
hänsynslöst
vard.
starkt vard
vatten
uppsvälld
liten
fjäder
dyna
luckra upp ull
sammetsliknande långhårigt
litet runt
kilformigt
sound
talking
pejorative
form
sound, wetness
form
form, diminutive
sound
form
gaze
rough surface structure
slang
slang
form
pejorative
pejorative
form, diminutive
pejorative
pejorative
sound, wetness
pejorative
slang
slang
wetness
pejorative
diminutive
soft consistency
soft consistency
soft consistency
soft consistency
form, diminutive
form
pracka
prassel
lura
ljud
pejorative
sound
Appendix 1
Sida 9
prat
prick
prilla
prillig
propp
propsa
prunka
pruta
prutt
pryl
pryl
pryttel
prål
prång
prångla
pröjs
pröjsare
skaka
skakel
skal
skalk
skall
skalla
skalle
skallra
skalm
skalpell
skalv
skare
skarp
skava
skavank
skippa
skopa
skorpa
skorr
skorvig
skorv
skott
skovel
skångra
skåra
tal
mycket liten rundad platt
portion
småtokig
föremål täppa hål öppning
envist kräva
lysande färger
övertala
fjärt
grovt nålformigt
onyttig överflödig
strålande
liten trång
tvivelaktigt knep
vard.
vard
rörelse
stång
hårt tunt hölje
hård kant
läte
ljuda starkt
hårdhet
ljud
avlång rörlig
rak
darra
hårt ytskikt
spetsig kant
hårt tryck föras upprepat
fel
hoppa
mindre halvklotformigt
hårdnad yta
ljud
yta hård ojämn
gammal förfallen
ljud
stor bred rundad
skaka starkt ljud
långsträckt fördjupning
talking
form, diminutive
slang
slang
form
talking
light
talking
sound
form
pejorative
slang
light
form, diminutive
pejorative
slang
slang
q or s movement
long thin form
hardness
hardness
sound
sound
hardness
sound
long thin form
long thin form
q or s movement
hardness
hardness
hardness
pejorative
q or s movement
round form
hardness
sound
hardness
pejorative
sound
round form
sound
long thin form
skrabba
skraj
skral
skraltig
skramla
skranglig
skrap
gammal utsliten
vard.
dålig
dålig svag
ljud
ostadig
ljud
destruction
slang
pejorative
destruction
sound
destruction
sound
Appendix 1
Sida 10
skratta
skri
skrocka
skrodera
skrot
skrovlig
skrubb
skrubba
skrubbor
skrumpen
skrutt
skrymsle
skrymt
skrynkla
skryta
skrål
skråma
skrälla
skrälle
skräna
skräp
skräppa
skrävla
skröna
skröplig
skval
skvaller
skvalp
skvalta
skvimpa
skvätt
ljud
läte starkt
läte
skryta
skräp värdelöst
grov ojämn yta
förvaringsutrymme
gnida hårt grov ojämn
bannor
förtorkad rynkig
dåligt
litet utrymme
spökeri troll
oönskat veck
tala överdrivet
pratande
mindre ytligt sår
ljud
gammalt nedslitet
röster
värdelös
skryta
skryta
lögnaktig
svag ömtålig
ljud vatten
löst prat
ljud
stänka
skvalpa små rörelser
liten mängd vätska
talking
talking
talking
talking, pejorative
destruction
rough surface str
pejorative
rough surface str
talking
rough surface structure
pejorative
diminutive
pejorative
rough surface structure
talking
talking
rough surface structure
sound
destruction
talking
destruction
talking, pejorative
talking, pejorative
talking, pejorative
destruction
sound, wetness
talking, pejorative
sound
wetness
movement, wetness
wetness
slabba
slabbertacka
slack
sladd
sladda
sladdra
sladdrig
slafs
slag
slak
slam
slammer
slampa
slams
slamsa
slana
slang
slank
vätska slarv
sladdertacka
alltför stor slakhet
tamp
okontrollerat glida
ointressant skvaller
saknar styvhet
kladdande
hård träff ljud ton
mjuk böjlig
vätska
starkt buller
lösaktig slarvig
värdelöst prat
smal sladdrig remsa
smal böjlig
långt böjligt
smal
wetness, pejorative
talking, pejorative
slackness
long thin form
q or s movement
talking, pejorative
slackness
wetness, pejorative
beat
slackness
wetness
sound
pejorative
pejorative
slackness, long thin form
slackness, long thin form
slackness, long thin form
long thin form
Appendix 1
Sida 11
slankig
slant
slapp
slarvig
slas
slasa
slask
slatt
slattrig
slejf
slem
slicka
slidder
sliddrig
slimmad
slinga
slinka
slinka
slinkig
slinta
slipa
slipprig
slips
slira
slisk
slita
slits
slok
sloka
sludder
slugga
slum
slunga
sluring
slurk
slusk
sluss
slutta
slyna
slyngel
slå
släde
slägga
slänga
slänt
släntra
slät
slätt
slö
slödder
alltför mjuk böjlig
långt, spö
alltför mjuk
inte noggrann och ordentlig
slö slarvig
gå tungt och hasande
blöt sörja sopor
bottenskvätt
slapp, pratig
band
segt sekret
flytande kletigt
ointressant skvaller
sladdrig
insydd
krök vindling
förflytta sig snabbt
prostituerad
sladdrig
plötsligt glatthet
yta slät gnida
hal kladdig
band
okontrollerat glida
äckligt kladdigt
häftigt rycka
smal öppen ränna
odåga
slapp avlång böjlig
otydligt tal
boxas vilt
förfallet
kasta stor rörelse
soppa
liten vätska
mycket smutsig ovårdad
vatten
luta nedåt yta
ouppfostrad slarvig
ouppfostrad
slag
medar
stor tung hammare
kasta vårdslöst häftigt
sluttning
gå långsamt utan mål
fri från ojämnhet yta
vidsträckt plant
kraftlös håglös
föraktad ouppfostrad
slackness
long thin form
slackness
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative, walking
wetness, pejorative
wetness, pejorative
talking, pejorative
long thin form
wetness
wetness
talking, pejorative
slackness
long thin form
long thin form
q or s movement
pejorative
slackness
q or s movement
smooth surface str
wetness, q or s movement
long thin form
q or s movement
wetness, pejorative
q or s movement
long thin form
pejorative
slackness
talking, pejorative
q or s movement
pejorative
q or s movement
wetness
wetness, diminutive
pejorative
wetness
potential movement
pejorative
pejorative
beat
long thin form
beat
q or s movement
potential movement
walking
smooth surface str
smooth surface str
pejorative
pejorative
Appendix 1
Sida 12
slösa
smack
smal
smash
smask
smatt
smatter
smegma
smet
smetana
smicker
smink
smisk
smita
smock
smocka
smolk
smuggla
smula
smussel
smuts
smutt
smutt
smyga
små
smäck
smäcker
smäda
smäkta
smäll
smälta
smärt
smärta
smätta
smörj
smörja
för mycket misshushålla
ljud
ringa bredd
snabbt hårt slag
ljud
prång
ljud
sekret
kladdig röra
tjock grädde
överdrivet
krämig konsistens
aga
avlägsna sig obehagligt
rynkning i rutmönster
hårt slag
smutspartikel
olovligt
liten partikel torr lös
i smyg olovligt
fläckar oönskade
liten klunk
prång
röra sig tyst och smidigt
ringa utsträckning
slag med handflata
slank elegant
omdöme
intensiv längtan
aga
flytande
smal smidig
plågsam känsla
ljud
stryk
mjukt kräm
pejorative
sound
narrow form
beat
sound
diminutive
sound
wetness
wetness
wetness
pejorative
wetness
beat
secrecy
rough surface str
beat
pejorative
secrecy
diminutive
secrecy
pejorative
diminutive
diminutive
secrecy
diminutive
beat
narrow form
talking
mental feeling
beat
wetness
narrow form
mental feeling
sound
beat
wetness
snabb
snabel
snacka
snafs
snagga
snappa
snar
snarka
snarpa
snarra
snaskig
snatta
snattra
mycket lång utdragen
prata
smuts
mycket kort
kort snabb rörelse
snabb
ljud
läte
skorra
sölig kladdig
mindre värde
läte
quickness
long thin form
talking
pejorative
small end form
quickness
quickness
sound
sound
sound
wetness, pejorative
pejorative
sound
Appendix 1
Sida 13
snava
snegla
snibb
snicksnack
(snigel)
sniken
snilja
snip
snirkel
snitsel
snitt
sno
sno
snobb
snodd
snofsa
snok
snopen
snopp
snor
snorkel
snorkig
snubba
snubbe
snubbla
snudig
snugga
snultra
snurra
snusa
snusk
snut
snutt
snuva
snyfta
snylta
snyta
snål
snäcka
snäppa
snärj
snärp
snärt
snärta
snäsa
snöd
snöpa
snöre
snörvla
falla snubbla
titta ögon
hörn trekantigt
struntprat
lång slemmig
girigt orättmätig
tråd
spetsig form
starkt böjd linje spiral
smal remsa
liten finare
långsmalt
snabbt
överdrivet fåfängt
garn
vard.
långt smalt
besviken
smal ända
slem
rör
oartig
tillrättavisning
vard.
falla
flink
liten pipa
långsträckt
vrida cirkelformig
hörbart andas
smuts illaluktande
vard
liten kort
slem
stötvisa andetag
ytnyttja
fräsa
överdrivet
spiralvridet
ljud
högt tempo
fågelläte
ända slag
nedsätt
irriterad tillrättavisning
fåfäng tarvlig
stumpa, vanställa
garn
ljud
walking
gaze
small end form
talking, pejorative
wetness, long thin form
pejorative
long thin form
small end form
winding form
long thin form
diminutive
long thin form
quickness
pejorative
long thin form
slang
long thin form
mental feeling
small end form
wetness
long thin form
pejorative
talking
slang
walking
quickness
diminutive
long thin form
winding form
sound
pejorative
slang
diminutive
wetness
sound
pejorative
sound
pejorative
winding form
sound
quickness
sound
beat
pejorative
talking
pejorative
pejorative
long thin form
sound
Appendix 1
Sida 14
spackel
spad
spade
spagat
spaljé
spalt
spana
spant
spark
sparre
sparris
spasm
spat
spatel
spatt
spe
spegel
speja
spektakel
spene
spenslig
sperma
speta
spets
spett
spex
spigg
spik
spila
spilkum
spill
spilla
spindel
spinkig
spinna
spinna
spira
spiral
degartat
vatten
platt
åt var sitt håll
spjälor
lodrät
blicken
balk
hård stöt
bjälke
stam
ryckning
klyvbart glansigt
platt avlångt
tokig överdrift
illvilligt förlöjligande
plan
blicken
förargelse
utväxt
tunn smal
vätska
litet tunt vasst
tunn ända avsmalnande
lång stång spets
parodisk dråplig
taggar
spetsig pinne
spjäla
liten skål
blir över
vätska
långa ben
mycket tunn
garn
ljud
smal stav
kurva vriden
wetness
wetness
thin form
separation
long thin form
long thin form
gaze
long thin form
beat
long thin form
long thin form
q or s movement
thin form, light
long thin form
jocular
jocular
smooth surface str
gaze
jocular
long thin form
long thin form
wetness
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form
jocular
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form
diminutive
pejorative
wetness
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form
sound
long thin form
winding form
spola
spole
spoling
spont
spotsk
spott
vatten
avlångt
ouppfostrad
utstående parti
hånfullhet
vätska
wetness
long thin form
pejorative
long thin form
attitude
wetness
spurt
sputum
spydig
spån
ökning av farten
slem
elaka kommentarer
tunn avhyvlad bit
q or s movement
wetness
attitude, talking
thin form
Appendix 1
Sida 15
spång
späd
spänta
spö
smal
liten
stickor
smal böjlig käpp
long thin form
diminutive
long thin form
long thin form
spjut
spjuver
spjäla
spjälka
lång smal stång hård spets
skämtar luras
ribba
sönderdela
long thin form
jocular
long thin form
destruction
splinta
split
splits
splitter
klyva
oenighet
ändar av tågvirke
små vass slagits sönder
separation
separation
separation
destruction, diminutive
spraka
spralla
spratt
sprattla
sprej
spreta
spri
spricka
sprida
springa
springa
sprinkler
sprint
sprits
spritta
sprudla
sprund
spruta
sprutt
spränga
sprätt
sprätta
spröjs
spröt
knastra gnistra
kroppsligen livlig
skämtsam lura
rörelser
finfördelat vätska
åt olika håll
smäckert rundhult
långsmalt brott
fördela utbredning
lång mycket smal öppning
förflytta sig
vatten, sprider
pinne
strut form
plötsligt rycka
bubblande välla fram
smal öppning
häftigt stråle vätska
fart vard.
stor kraft splittras
överdrivet
kringkastande
list
långt, smalt
sound, light
q or s movement
jocular
q or s movement
wetness, separation
separation
long thin form
long thin form
separation
long thin form
walking
wetness, separation
long thin form
long thin form
q or s movement
q or s movement, wetness
long thin form
q or s movement, wetness
q or s movement
separation
pejorative
separation
long thin form
long thin form
stabbig
stake
stamma
stampa
stappla
stav
stepp
stick
sticka
kort kraftig
lång käpp
tala stötigt
stöta hårt ljudligt
gå ostadig
långt smalt
ljudliga slag
smärtsamt vass
tunn vass flisa
short form
long thin form
talking, iterative
sound, iterative
walking
long thin form
sound, beat
bodily feeling
long thin form
Appendix 1
Sida 16
stift
stig
stilett
stim
sting
stint
stirra
stirrig
stock
stoft
stoj
stolle
stolpe
smalt spetsigt
smal
stickvapen smal
ljud röster
smärtsam vass
blick
titta
upprörd virrig
stam
små partiklar
högljutt prat
tok
påle
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form
talking
bodily feeling
gaze
gaze
mental feeling
long thin form
fine grain
talking
pejorative
long thin form
stubb
stubbe
studsa
stulta
stump
stumpa
stura
stursk
stybb
stycka
stylta
stympa
styng
styv
stång
stånka
stänka
stöddig
stön
stöppla
stör
stöt
stötta
stöv
uppstickande strån
uppstickande rest
rörelse
tulta
återstående bit
liten
tjura
trotsig fräck
finfördelat spill
hugga i bitar
stång
avhuggning
smärtsam vasst
ej lätt böjs
avlängt rakt
läte
vätska
stor kraftig alltför självsäker
ljud
stöta
stång
rörelse kraftigt
stolpe
hudavlagring
short form
short form
q or s movement, iterative
walking
short form
diminutive
attitude
attitude
fine grain
separation
long thin form
short form
bodily feeling
stiffness
long thin form
talking
wetness
attitude, pejorative
sound
q or s movement
long thin form
q or s movement
long thin form
fine grain
strak
stram
streamer
streck
stretch
strigel
stril
strimla
strimma
stripa
stropp
rak stel
spänd
långsmal remsa
kortare linje
töjbar
läderrem
ljud av vätska
liten långsmal bit
långsmalt band ljus
rak hårtest
ögleformad
stiffness
stiffness
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form, sound, wetness
long thin form
long thin form, light
long thin form
round form
Appendix 1
Sida 17
strosa
strul
strunt
strut
strutta
strå
stråk
stråle
stråt
sträcka
sträng
sträv
strö
ström
strössel
ströva
lugnt promenera
besvärligt
värdelöst
konformigt
gå knyckigt
stjälk
bandliknande
ljus
väg bana
längd
spänd tråd
yta ojämnhet
finfördelat material
rinnande vatten
avlånga korn
långsamt gå
walking
pejorative
pejorative
long thin form
walking
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form, light
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form
rough surface str
fine grain
long thin form, wetness
fine grain, long thin form
walking
svabba
svacka
svada
svaja
svalla
svamla
svank
svans
svassa
svepa
svett
svicka
svida
svikt
sving
svirvel
svischa
svulstig
svämma
sväng
svära
svärm
sväva
tvätta långa garnändar
större fördjupning
tala länge
svänga fram och tillbaka
röra sig häftigt
prata strunt
inåtböjt
långsmal
tillgjort
rörelse
vätska
tapp
brännande smärta
böjlighet
rörelse
vridbar
ljud
alltför
vatten
rörelse
yttra
flygande mindre
rörelse
wetness, long thin form
bent form
talking
q or s movement
q or s movement
talking. pejorative
bent form
long thin form
pejorative, walking
q or s movement
wetness
short form
bodily feeling
bent form
q or s movement
q or s movement
sound
pejorative
q or s movement, wetness
q or s movement
talking
q or s movement
q or s movement
tradig
traggel
trampa
trams
trasa
traska
trassel
tratt
trava
långtråkig
ständig tröttsam upprepning
rörelse
dumt prat
sönderrivet
gå vårdslöst klumpigt
virrvarr krångel
strutformig pip tratt
röra sig
pejorative
pejorative
walking
pejorative, talking
destruction
walking, pejorative
pejorative
long thin form
walking
Appendix 1
Sida 18
tredsk
trilla
trilla
trilsk
trind
tripp
trippa
trips
trissa
trist
troll
tromb
tromla
tross
trubbel
trubbig
trudelutt
trulig
truls
trumla
trumma
trumpen
trumpet
trunk
truta
tryne
tråd
tråg
tråkig
trål
tråna
trång
träda
träns
träsk
träta
envis ovillighet
falla
forma runt
enveten motsträvig
klotrund form
kortare
gå små lätta hoppande
liten
liten rund
enformig nedstämd
ful klumpig enfaldig
häftig luftvirvel
roterande cylindrisk
lina
besvär problem
inte avsmalnande
glad melodi(stump)
trumpen
liten slarvig
roterande
slaginstrument
butter och missnöjd
blåsinstrument
stor
skjuta fram läpparna
nos
tunt utdraget
avlångt fyrkantigt
enformig negativ
strutformig
känna stark längtan
minsta
långsamma steg
snöre
vatten
irriterad ordväxling
bad mood
falling
round form
bad mood
round form
diminutive
walking, diminutive
diminutive
round form, diminutive
bad mood
pejorative
q or s movement
q or s movement
long hin form
bad mood
short form
short form
bad mood
pejorative
q or s movement
sound
bad mood
sound
augmentative
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form
long thin form
bad mood
long thin form
mental feeling
diminutive
walking
long thin form
wetness
bad mood, talking
tving
tvinna
sammanhållning
sno ihop trådar
putting together
putting together, long thin for
vrak
vrede
vrensk
vresig
vret
vricka
vrida
vrål
vrång
vräka
skadat odugligt
stark känsla förorättad
själsligt motsträvig
ovänlig missnöje
liten
kraftigt vrida
runt rörelse
skrik
sur motsträvig
handlöst kasta
destruction
bad mood
bad mood
bad mood
diminutive
q or s movement
q or s movement
talking
bad mood
q or s movement
Appendix 1
Sida 19
vräkig
vränga
vrövel
överdrivet
vända fel
struntprat
pejorative
pejorative
talking, pejorative
Appendix 1
Sida 20
'Pejorative'
Swedish
usch
hu
"t" [|]
blä
ha
håhå (jaja)
tvi
öh
äh
bah
asch
äsch
isch
uh
urrk
fy
bu
tss
u:
Ojbjak:
j
Icelandic
[O ]
]
[
[ ]
English
oh
p o oh
phew
ugh
ooh
tut [|]
boo
ox
Oj
O
Polish
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
fui
juj
jOj
u:
o:
Hungarian
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[|]+gesture
h
i
uœk
h
h
h
Finnish
[ ¨]
[ ¨ ¨ ]
[hui]
[|]
]
[
whistle
œh
pçO
fjO
Ososo
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
ts
E
dE
Malagasi
[ ] (nasal
)
[ ]
whistle
fE
fO
Slovenian
[ I]
[ I]
Some interjections for 9 different languages. (Swedish and English are written in ordinary orthography)
Appendix 2
Icelandic
[ha]
English
oh
ah
whoops
'other bodily and mental feeling'
Swedish
Icelandic English
oh
aj
[aj]
[Ou]
ow
('pain')
[au]
ouch
'surprise'
Swedish
oj
åh
ä
åhå
hoppsan
'positive' (appreciation, joy etc)
Swedish
Icelandic English
oh
tjo(hej)
[vau]
ah
[jipiO]
ah
wow
åh
yippee
haha(ha)
hihi(hi)
m:
Polish
[Ox]
[O]
Polish
[O:]
Polish
[O]
[m:]
Finnish
[ah]
[m:]
[jip:i]
Hungarian Finnish
[au]
[aj]
[jaj]
[juj]
Hungarian Finnish
[je:]
[o:]
[o:]
[m:]
[h¨]
Hungarian
[oh]
kissing
sound +
gesture
[|]
Ososo
[Ou]
[euo:]
Ososo
[Ou]
[aj]
Ososo
[ah]
sigh
Malagasi
[aj]
Malagasi
[a]
Malagasi
-
Slovenian
[aIs]
[ux]
Slovenian
[Oho:]
(positive)
[Ox]
[O:]
[OI]
(negative)
[jOI]
(negative)
Slovenian
-
hm:
m:
[´:]
[h¨]
[haptsi]
[ux]
-
-
[apCik]
phew
-
aha
haha
oho
-
atishoo
[aha]
[jOj]
-
-
-
[br:]
-
[O]
[Oj]
[br:]
[hm]
-
hm
[ahem]
brrh
[ı]
(voiceless) u g h
hm
(ingressive)
[nu]
puh
[F]
[´f:]
pust
('e x h a u s t - sighs
ion')
ojojoj
[ajE]
vojvoj
håhåjaja
('complain
-ing')
aha
('s u d d e n
insight')
iiih
inhalation
('fear')
atjo
[at·Cu:]
('sneeze' )
brr
burr
('freezing')
hm
('t h o u g h t fulness')
åhej('åhå')
('joint
effort' )
[itC·imi]
silence
[h¨i]
[euo:]
[Oia]
[aha:]
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
expiration -
-
-
[huhuh]
work
songs
-
[hm]
-
shivering
sound
shivering
sound
[a·tCix]
[tCixah]
[Ox]
[aha:]
-
-
-
-
-
pull pull
(to hens)
('c o m e
here')
'commands
Swedish
schas
('g o
away')
mums
namnam
m:
('good
taste')
grr
('anger')
-
[gibagiba gib] (voiceless
[b]) (to
sheep)
[putaputaput]
(to hens)
to animals'
Icelandic English
shoo
[S:]
+gesture
[tvi:tvi:]
[hOuhOu] (to
sheep)
[gr:]
[ Oh] (with
coarse
voice)
yummy
[m:]
[nam]
[namEnamE]
-
Polish
[S:]
-
[njamnjam]
-
[m:]
-
-
Hungarian Finnish
[hœS] (to
[S:]
insects)
[Sits]
-
-
-
Ososo
[Cu:]
maybe
imitation
of animal
smacking
noise
-
Malagasi
[uS:]
-
Slovenian
[pC:]
(c o m m o n
command
to several
animals
"march")
-
swearing
[ m:] (with
rising intonation)
[n´mn´m]
bu
(to scare
somebody)
vyss vyss
lull lull
(pu t ti n g
sb to
sleep)
'commands
Swedish
jaja
aja(baja)
ajaj
(m i l d
warning
to
children)
sc h
(be quiet)
pst
(soft call
for
attention)
[bi¨mbi¨m] h u s h a b y
[s¨s¨˘s¨s¨˘]
singing
ba
[ ]
boo
]
]
bu:
-
bux
[
[
whistling
here
hey
[ ]
[¨u ] (=du)
hai
[ ]
tC:
njE
Polish
[ ] (=no)
sh
English
now now
no no
naughty
naughty
[¨s˘]
svei
fOs:
to people'
Icelandic
[ ]
]
[
[sveiDr]
]
]
he:
bu
hu
[ ]
[ ]
-
]
kuS:
tCit
[
[
[
-
[b¨]
pst
S:
[ ]
+gesture
[ ] (in
play)
œlœ
S:
dja
EnE
´
a
e
S:
[ ]
Malagasi
-
Slovenian
family
[ ]
name
[ ]=you
pst or
whistling
(to
prostitute)
[ ]
[ ] (coarse voice)
[ ] (coarse
voice)
[ ]
(quietly)
gesture
kai
Hungarian Finnish
Ososo
[
] (verb [ ]
negation)
ohoj
hoho
(louder
call for
attention)
[¨u ] (=du)
[ EwE] (not
to adults)
[Ei]
_
-