Studies in sound symbolism

GOTHENBURG MONOGRAPHS IN LINGUISTICS 17
Studies in
Sound Symbolism
Åsa Abelin
Department of Linguistics, Göteborg University, Sweden, 1999
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
STUDIES IN SOUND SYMBOLISM
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 may 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 related to synaesthesia.
The productivity of phonesthemes was tested in experiments of
production and understanding. The experiments show that in
interpretation 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 also often 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 differences 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.
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, 1999
Åsa Abelin
Contents
Chapter 0
Introduction
1
Chapter 1
Background
3
Chapter 2
Theoretical framework
48
Chapter 3
Method
67
Chapter 4
Analysis of initial consonant clusters
73
Chapter 5
Analysis of final consonant clusters, vowels and
combinations.
139
Chapter 6
Some contrastive studies in sound symbolism
185
Chapter 7
Experiments with words constructed from phonesthemes
215
Chapter 8
Summary and discussion
240
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
1.1
1.2
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.2.5
1.2.6
1.3
1.3.1
1.3.2
1.3.3
1.3.4
12
1.4
1.4.1
1.4.2
1.4.3
1.4.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.7.1
1.7.2
1.7.3
1.8
1.9
1.10
Introduction
Background
Purpose of the chapter
Terminology
Onomatopoeia
Sound symbolism
Phonestheme
Ideophone
Morpheme
Conclusion
Is sound symbolism the rule or the exception in
language?
Sound symbolism is an exception
Symbolism is fundamental to language
Sound symbolism is both inside and outside of
language
Evaluation of discussion of sound symbolism
Is sound symbolism productive or not?
Sound symbolism is not productive
Sound symbolism is productive
Greater or lesser degree of productivity
Evaluation of the discussion of productivity
The question of etymology
The phylogenesis of language
Universality versus language specificity
Sound symbolism is universal
Symbolism is not universal
Evaluation of the discussion of universality
versus language specificity in sound symbolism
Context
A framework for models of sound symbolism
Expression and content of sound symbolism
1
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
5
8
9
9
9
11
12
12
13
13
13
14
18
20
20
21
22
23
26
28
1.10.1 Expression
1.10.2 Content
1.10.3 Expression and content in different analyses
29
29
29
2
3
4
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
76
31
37
41
41
43
44
46
48
48
48
50
50
51
52
55
58
61
64
67
67
70
70
70
72
72
72
73
73
75
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
5
4.2.2 Proportions of motivated root morphemes. Summary
4.2.3 Types of meaning
Frequent semantic features
4.3.1 Pejorative
4.3.2 Sound
4.3.3 Long thin form
4.3.4 Quick or strong movement
4.3.5 Wetness
4.3.6 The most sound symbolic clusters
Frequent clusters
4.4.1 The cluster sl4.4.2 The cluster sn4.4.3 The cluster kn4.4.4 The cluster kr4.4.5 The cluster fn4.4.6 The cluster kn4.4.7 The cluster gn4.4.8 The cluster spr4.4.9 The cluster pjTypical or unique meanings
Patterns of semantic features
Discussion and conclusions
Analysis of final consonant clusters, vowels and
combinations
139
5.1
5.2
Final clusters
Summary of the analysis of semantic features for
final clusters
82
84
89
89
96
101
104
106
111
113
113
116
118
120
122
124
124
126
127
128
131
137
139
146
5.3
5.4
Properties of consonant clusters of Nusvensk Frekvensordbok
148
5.3.1 Summary of the analysis of properties of different
final clusters
161
Vowels
161
5.4.1 Vowel pairs and triplets
161
5.5
clusters
5.7
6
6.1
6.2
5.4.2 Vowels in light/gaze-words
163
5.4.3 The vowel [!]
164
5.4.4 Summary of vowels
164
Comparisons of final clusters of roots from different sources
164
5.5.1 NFO4 and Sigurd (1965)
164
5.5.2 The most frequent final clusters in NFO4
168
5.5.3 Discussion of final clusters in Svensk
Baklängesordbok and of Nusvensk Frekvensordbok
169
5.6
Combinations of initial and final consonant
171
5.6.1 Initial cluster + no final cluster
172
5.6.2 No initial cluster + final cluster
176
5.6.3 Initial cluster + final cluster
179
5.6.4 Summary of combinations
182
Summary and discussion of initial and final clusters,
and vowels
183
Some contrastive studies in sound symbolism
185
Introduction
185
The Thesaurus study
185
6.2.1 Method
185
6.2.2 Results
186
6.2.2.1Words for 'stupidity' in English
186
6.3
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
186
187
188
189
190
191
6.3.2 Discussion of Swedish expressive interjections,
commands and greetings
192
6.4
198
6.3.3 Phonological and phonetic similarities and
dissimilarities between interjections of different languages
193
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
198
201
6.4.3 Results from a test of expressions for animal calls
in different languages
202
6.5
6.6
6.4.4 Discussion of the test on identifying animal calls
Conclusions of studies of expressive interjections
and expressions of animal calls
Test of cross language interpretation of Swedish
onomatopoeic and other sound symbolic words
203
6.6.1 Method
6.6.2 Results of interpretation of cross language Swedish
onomatopoeic and other sound symbolic words
207
6.6.3 Conclusions from the test on cross language
interpretation of Swedish onomatopoeic and other
sound symbolic words
211
General conclusions and discussion of the cross
language studies
205
204
205
6. 7
213
7
Experiments with words constructed from
phonesthemes
215
7.1
Production and understanding
215
7.1.1 Forced choice for production - from meaning to
phonological (graphic) form
219
7.1.2 Forced choice for understanding - from phonological
form to meaning
222
7.1.3 Free production test from constructed words to
meanings
225
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
228
234
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
240
240
241
246
250
252
252
257
260
261
262
265
235
8
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?
1
cf. p. 4
1
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?
2
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.
2
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 an
3
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
! will be used for the short rounded close-mid vowel, e.g. the first vowel in muttra
(mutter).
4
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 fl- is 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).
5
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-, fjwhich can be called ‘‘allophonests2’’ to a phonestheme (with pejorative
meaning), in an item-and-arrangement analysis. (Alternatively, pj-, bj- and
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. We also have a variation
2This term will, however, not be used further.
3There can also be interaction between different sounds in the word, cf. analysis in 5.5.
6
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.)
7
There also seems to be a further terminological issue here, in that sound
symbolism tends to be reserved for universal phenomena and 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 selfexpression. 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
8
interconnected for the naive members of the speech community. For
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 nonarbitrariness 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,
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’’
9
phonotactic ‘‘divergencies’’ and sentence final position. The greatest
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 wr- is
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
5Cf. the Swedish clusters kr- and sn-, in chapter 4.
10
sound symbolic vocabulary (as pointed out by Hinton, Nichols, Ohala
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).
11
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
12
words in the experiments of this thesis, listeners have no objections to or
difficulties in assigning some interpretation to them (cf. 7.1.3).
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’’,
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.
13
*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.’’
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 cross-linguistic
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
7Because of the [!], cf. 5.4.3.
14
claims that ‘‘sound symbolism makes some words more fit to survive’’.
The word roll, in French rouler, etc. derived from Latin rota + 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
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.
15
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
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
16
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. 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.
17
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
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.
18
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
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).
19
There seems to be a general agreement that phonesthemes are language
specific, a conclusion which is not necessary; besides, phonesthemes are
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
20
sound symbolism. In Finnish the vowels (and the consonants) are
unequally rooted in the system. The vowel ö /ø/ is the most recent arrival
(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
21
semantic fields are more likely to contain sound symbolism, e.g.
[DIMINUTIVE].
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, highpitched, 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.
22
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 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
23
more dependent on the linguistic or extralinguistic context for their
interpretation.
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).
24
Nerman (1954) makes an interesting analysis of the sound symbolism of
vowels and consonants in Swedish poetry. He writes that they always stand
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
25
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.
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 non-arbitrary 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:
9The arrows in the model in figure 1.3 stand for different types of relationships, which
are spelled out in the text below.
26
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.
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
27
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.
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
28
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 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
29
long words for entreaty; the category also mirrors perfective,
distance in time and space.
plural,
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.
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
30
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.
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):
-ump
awkward, heavy
sound
content
gl-
phenomena of light
Bloomfield (1933):
fl-
phenomena of movement
sound
content
itr
intermittent
fl-
moving light
ow
steady
fl-
movement in air
Er
intense
gl-
unmoving light
kr-
bent
sl-
smoothly wet
-amble
locomotion
kr-
noisy impact
-ust
surface formation
skr-
grating impact or sound
-usty
old
sn-
breath-noise
-lessness
indifference
sn-
quick separation or
i
diminutive
-utter
discontinuity
sn-
creep
-ash
hit, fragments
dJ-
up-and-down-movement
tw-
twisting motion
b-
dull impact
st-
arrest
-E
violent movement
sp-t
rush of liquid
-E´
big light or noise
str-p
line having breadth
-awns
quick movement
st-nt
piece of performance
-im (´)
small light or noise
sk
swift movement
-Um
clumsy
movement
31
-Et(´)
particled movement
Humboldt (1836/1907, German)
sound
content
st-
firmness
n-
sharp cutting
w-
random movement
u
hollow and dark
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, scarf)
n-
3 dimensional
(knob, knot, node, nut)
sp-
cylindrical
(spool, spine, spike)
dr-/tr-
liquid
(drink, drain, trickle, trough)
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 onset
(pop, ping, peep)
b-
abrupt, loud onset
(boom, bang, beep)
bl-
loud, air-induced sound
(blat, blast, blab)
kl-
abrupt onset
(clank, click, clip, clop)
r-
irregular onset
(rip, roar, roll)
y
loud, vocal tract noise
(yell, yap, yak)
Q-
low pitch, slow onset
(thump, thud)
pl-
abrupt onset (plink, plop, plunk)
kr-
abrupt onset
(creak, crack, crunch)
tS-
irregular onset
(chirp, cheep, chatter)
w-
poorly resolvable onset
(whiz, whack, wham)
z-
poorly resolvable onset
(zip, zing, zap, zoom)
32
dr-
liquid
(drip, drain, drop, drizzle)
sl-
liquid
(slop, slush)
fl-
liquid
(flow, flush, flood)
m-
liquid
(mud, mush, mire, marsh)
Plato:
(sounds and meanings discussed
in Cratylos, on Greek))
Jespersen (1918):
form
content
sound
content
r
movement
m
roundness
i
all fineness (it can
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
penetrate everything)
ph, ps, s, z
everything similar to
airstreams
d, t
binding and standing
still
l
gliding movement
gl
something sticky
n-
inside (it is
pronounced inside the
mouth)
a
size (largeness?)
e (eta)
length (long?)
o
roundness
Sapir (1921):
sound process
content
reduplication
distribution, plurality,
repetition, customary
Wescott (1975): (content is often
not mentioned)
activity, increase of
sound
content
size, added intensity,
uw
emotive
continuance
z
‘‘an unusual semantic
function’’
Malkiel (1978):
‘‘sound repetition’’
sound process
content
‘‘sound alternation’’
reduplication
disorder, confusion,
‘‘allolinguistic prefix’’
+vowel change
rubbish, thrash
‘‘pentestheme’’
33
coward, failure or
deceiving
Householder (1946)
past tense, past
no sounds
content
participle
dislike
deficient in some
destruction
desirable quality
projection
protuberance
(short and roundish)
Sigurd, B. (1965) (Swedish):
collectives: heap or
sound
meaning
pile,
fj-
pejorative
cluster or knot, large
fn-
pejorative
shapeless piece,
pj-
pejorative
indefinite
-ms
pejorative
number or amount
-mp
pejorative
thick, coarse, soft
-sk
pejorative
substance
-b(e)l
pejorative
dull, loud, indistinct
-m(e)l
pejorative
noise
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).
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).
34
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
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,
35
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
articulatory position (labial-dental: small-large); accentuation of vowels is
heavily in favor of largeness and darkness.
36
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 acute10 segments with 'small' category words, and
acoustically grave11 segments with 'big' category words. These results are
explained with reference to the ‘‘frequency code’’ theory developed by
Ohala (1994). This theory implies that sound symbolism is a manifestation
of a larger ethological phenomenon that is also seen in the vocal
10high frequency energy
11low frequency energy
37
communication and certain facial expressions12 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 energy13 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 front
consonants (e. g. p) were more pleasant than back consonants (e.g. g); high
frequency sounds were associated with smallness and impotence. However,
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.
38
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
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
39
(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
nos14 (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 perceptual
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
‘‘gestures’’ cannot even have an observer, if one excepts that front
articulations can be seen. However, there might be proprioception
involved.
14This is of course not correct.
40
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
structure', 'movement'. (This resembles Müller's (1861) ‘‘ding dong
theory’’.)
41
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.)
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
42
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 neurological and biological explanations
A specific, neurological explanation for why languages often represent
movement with the same sort of sound symbolic forms that they use for 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
43
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 soundsymbolic 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.
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
44
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.
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
45
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, non-high 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.
46
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
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.
46
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 -conventional
arbitrary
door
motivated
shriek
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
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').
47
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
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
48
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
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
49
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.
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:
50
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
(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)
51
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:
em otion, bodily r eaction
step 1:
indexical r elation
expression (cry, i.e.
sound)
step 2:
iconic relation
linguistic form
step 3:
linguistic
expr ession
conv entionalization
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.
1
Linguistic form is a phonetic form associated with a meaning.
52
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).
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'
53
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:
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.
54
meaning
?-relation
linguistic expression
Figure 2.3 Schematic illustration of other sound symbolism.
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
55
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
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
56
Putting together (convergence)
Diminutive
Augmentative
Form
Iterative
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):
57
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.
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:
66
(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
consistent in its way of giving definitions. Sometimes a word is only given
a very short definition, e.g. a synonym.
1
For lexically infrequent clusters, with less than 13 roots, 1 root sufficed if it had one of
the recurring semantic features.
67
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 al,
1980) the number of lexical morphemes in Swedish amount to around
8,300 (suffixes add another 562 morphemes).
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.
68
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,
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
69
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.
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).
70
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.
71
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-, fl-, 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-, sv-, 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 considered at this
1This
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.
72
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'.)
2For
an analysis of combined effects of initial cluster, final clusters and, to some extent,
of vowels, see 5.6.
73
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.
74
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.
75
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.
no of motiv roots
76
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
spj
all roots
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.
77
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.
4It
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.)
78
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
bj
all roots
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.
79
Table 4.1 Number of root morphemes and motivated root morphemes.
total number of root
motivated root
Rank
morphemes
morphemes
bj13
5
32
bl64
33
13
br130
11
25
dr74
16
23
fj24
7
29
fl96
36
10
fn10
10
26
fr87
10
26
gl69
45
7
gn22
20
21
gr126
26
16
kl115
51
5
kn77
59
3
kr169
53
4
kv56
17
22
mj11
7
29
nj3
1
36
pj7
6
31
pl100
34
12
pr200
21
20
sk116
25
17
skr63
35
11
skv10
9
28
sl150
83
1
sm55
31
14
sn126
62
2
sp137
47
6
spj6
4
34
spl9
5
32
spr34
23
18
st279
45
7
str77
30
15
sv65
23
18
tr169
44
9
tv20
3
35
vr19
12
23
80
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.
81
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.
82
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 fnis 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 diagrams 'other
83
mental feeling', etc is simply called 'mental feeling'5. The feature 'slang' is a
stylistic feature and in fact adds another dimension.
Sound:
Sound
Talking
Beat
Movement:
Movement
Quick or strong movement
Walking
Falling
Potential movement
Quickness
Light:
Light
Gaze
Surface structure:
Rough surface structure
Smooth surface structure
Consistency:
Soft consistency
(Plasticity)
Hardness
Slackness
Stiffness
Wetness:
Wetness
Adhesion
Dryness:
Dryness
Attitude:
Attitude
Secrecy
Slang:
Slang
Jocular:
Jocular
Pejorative:
Pejorative
Destruction
Mental feeling:
Mental feeling
Bad mood
Bodily feeling:
Bodily feeling
Suffocation
Separation:
Separation
Putting together
Putting together
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'.
84
Diminutive:
Augmentative:
Form:
Iterative:
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
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
freq semantic
freq semantic
freq
feature
feature
feature
'pejorative'
163
'gaze'
15
'attitude'
5
'sound'
107
'thin form'
14
'jocular'
5
'long thin form' 97
'smooth surface' 13
'falling'
5
'quick or strong 67
'slang'
12
'soft
4
movement'
consistency'
'wetness'
63
'beat'
12
'small end form' 4
'talking'
55
'slackness'
11
'secrecy'
4
'light'
32
'rough surface
10
'iterative'
3
structure'
'diminutive'
31
'separation'
9
'bent form'
3
'round form'
23
'putting together' 9
'narrow form'
3
'way of walking' 22
'hardness'
8
'stiffness'
2
'destruction'
21
'bodily feeling'
8
'potential
2
movement'
'winding form'
20
'fine grain'
8
'light tactile
2
sensation'
'short-wide form' 18
'hollow form'
8
'augmentative' 1
'bad mood'
18
'quickness'
6
'dryness'
1
'form'
16
'adhesion'
6
85
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.
86
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-, vr- and 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-.
87
5. Analysis of final consonant clusters and vowels and
of combinations
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.
5.1 Final clusters
1Or,
for lexically infrequent clusters, 1 root
137
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.
2Svensk
Baklängesordbok contains lemmas from SAOL and from newspaper articles,
and does not exactly match Svensk Ordbok.
3Approximately 22% of the final clusters from NFO4 are sound symbolic, cf. table
5.17.
138
%
/tSa/
/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/
/sta/
(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)
(talking, quick or strong movement)
4'Slang'
51/1
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.
139
100%
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).
140
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
pingla
ringla
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.
tinkle
sound
coil
quick or strong
141
kringla
vingla
pretzel
stagger
fjolla
lolla
foolish woman
scatter-brained
woman
paint with a
roller
scroll
fool of a woman
bun
reel
roll
blunder
curl
grope
rolla
skrolla
stolla
bulla
lulla
rulla
drulla
krulla
famla
ramla
skramla
svamla
strimla
vimla
tromla
fumla
humla
mumla
rumla
drumla
tumla
stöppla
sörpla
haspla
porla
sorla
rassla
prassla
tassla
gnissla
tissla
vissla
rossla
klampa
slampa
trampa
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.
tumble
falling
rattle
sound
drivel
talking
strip
long thin form
swarm
quick or strong
movem.
rotating
quick or strong
cylindrical sieve movement
fumble
quick or strong
movem.
bumble-bee
sound
mumble
talking
be on the spree quick or strong
movement
blunder
quick or strong
movem.
tumble
quick or strong
movem.
give painted
quick or strong
surface a certain movement
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
slut
pejorative
tramp
walking
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
poppa
stamp
tumble
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.
pop up
quick or strong
movem.
142
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
knirra
pirra
stirra
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
creak
sound
tingle
bodily feeling
stare
gaze
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
nafsa
snafsa
wander about
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
snap
quick or strong
movem.
snap
quick or strong
movem.
143
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
brista
hosta
pusta
frusta
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.
burst
destruction
cough
talking
pant
talking
snort
talking
hysta
throw
quick or strong
movem.
wind
quick or strong
movem.
breathing a word talking
nysta
knysta
krysta
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
6Double
Final clusters6
ffa, Nla, 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
tSa, 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.
144
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
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
initial clusters
pejorative
sound
long thin form
quick or strong
movement
wetness
talking
light
diminutive
round form
walking
destruction
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.
5.3 Properties of consonant clusters of Nusvensk
Frekvensordbok
145
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.
146
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.
181
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.
182
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.
183
'Smoothness'
Both subjects agreed on the words sleek and glossy.
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 skr- and
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 [!].
'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.
184
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
185
languages that have a Thesaurus). Naturally, native informants have to be
used.
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.
186
Table 6.1 The semantic features of interjections and their correspondences
in earlier chapters.
Features of interjections
pejorative
positive
surprise
song
other bodily or mental
feeling
commands
greetings
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
187
aha
aj
brr
hm
åhej(åhå)
puh
pust
ojojoj
vojvoj
håhå(jaja)
atjo
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 expressive interjections,
commands and greetings
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
188
studied here. None of the phonological or phonetic characteristics is clearly
connected with a certain semantic feature.
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
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, kaakah, tschah, tjas, hlutt, schtschi, tjihitt, tjihihitt, tjitjisit (Ideforss, 1928, p. 25).
189
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. 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
surprise
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
O (7), a (4)
O:
English: 1
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
j (3), p (3)
j:
Icelandic: 1
English: 1
Finnish: 1
p:
Icelandic: 1
English: 1
Finnish: 1
j (3), h (3)
j:
Hungarian: 1
190
pain
freezing
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
thoughtfulness
-
exhaustion
u (4)
u:
English: 1
Polish: 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
h (4)
h:
Hungarian: 1
Finnish: 3
191
sudden insight
sneeze
good taste
commands to
animals
mild warning to
children
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 (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
-
s (3)
s:
Icelandic: 3
192
be quiet
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
-
scaring somebody u (5)
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
and the interjection uh for 'tiredness', and an imitation of the horse's neigh
or the interjection gnägg.5
5There is reason to believe that comic strips have contributed to a conventionalization
of both writing and speech (via writing).
193
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. Relations
interjections.
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).
194
Table 6.4.a Interjections imitating 7 animal calls, from 16 different languages.
mouse
cat
goat/
sheep
mœœ:
mœhœ:
mE:mE:
dog
mUNmUN kulkul
kENkEN
waNwaN bu:bu:
hihi:hiN Im:E:
mimi:
mimie:
mœ:œ:
w´w´w´
ahahaha Na:
Finnish
tSikTSik jaON
njaON
tSiju:
nija:
nijaN
tSitSitSi mimio
mijao
pyppyp miau
Estonian
pi:p
miau
Urdu
tSitSi
miaow
Persian
-
miau
Kurdish
DikDikDikmiau
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
Korean
Japanese
Chinese
mØk:
mœ:
mE:
bE:
bE:bE:
pig
IhIhIh
horse
cow
hihiN
mo:
hauhau rØhrØh ihaha:
vuhvuh
auxaux ØhØh
ihaha
am:u:
bONbON –
m:
mu:
-
howhow korokorohihihi:
daNtSo
wOwwOw –
habhab
–
hauhau –
mE:
ma:
bOrabOr
hEehEe bu:
hihi
mu:
bœ:
mœ:
be:be.
bauwau OiNkOiNkneigh
mu:
wOfwOf
japjap
vuv:uv nØf:nØf: gnEg:nEg"#
vufvuf
guau
OiNkOiNkmu:
pi:p pi:p miau
mœ:
vufvuf
Hungarian
-
miau
Ososo
-
miau
bœ:œœ vauvau rØf:rØf: mœkmœk
bœœ
bOubOu imitation -
miau
_
njihaha "$%
mu:
mu:
Table 6.4.b Interjections imitating another 8 animal calls, from 16 different languages.
crow
Korean
cuckoo
owl
duck
hen
rooster
ka:kka:k pUkuk-pUkuk
puUN-puUN
kwak-kwakkokotœ-koko
kokjo:
195
frog
chicken
-
-
ka:ka:
kak:o:
ho:kho:k ga:ga:
kokoko kokekoko Japanese
tSijatSijapukupukuahaha
ka:kak
kukuku kIkIkI
Chinese
va:kva:k kuk:u:-kuk:u:
huhu:
kvak-kvakkO:tkotkot
kuk:u-kie:ku
kva:k
Finnish
kuku
uhu:
prœ:k
kaka
kukeleku:Estonian
kajkaj
kokokoko kvakva kONkON-kON
kOk´lON-kON
Urdu
VarVar hoho
huo:
kwak-kwakVodVod kukuli-koko
Persian
ba:bu:-ba:bu:
kwak-kwakkOkOkokOqOqOqOqO
Kurdish
hu:hu: waq
ququ
qoqoqo Arabic
krakra kuku
uhu:
kwakwa koko
kukuriku Polish
kOwkOw kuku:
kwak-kwakkl´kkl´k kOk´-dud´ldu:
English
kraks-kraks
kuku:
huhu:
kvakkvak kakaka (!&)'*&#% kvak:vak: pi:p pi:p
Swed&'!&&'!&
ish
kwak-kwakkikiriki: Spanish
bra:bra: kakaka &!&)'*&!% pi:ppi:p
Ice&,#&&,#&+ #-.%
landic+
haphap kOtkOt kukuriku tCiptCip
Hung-arianka:rka:r Ososo
-
-
u:u:
kuOk
klOkklOkkukur-u:ku
krukkruktCiatCia
OkO-kOrOkO
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
196
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 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 of 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.
197
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
m!1:
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.
198
8 Swedish
expected answer
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
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
1
1
bird
2
199
great titmouse
small bird
snake
?
1
1
1
3
sparrow
chicken
?
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
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, [m!1:])
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
200
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 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:nØf:]
cf. table 6.4. The imitations of animal calls can be conventionalized in
different ways in the different languages, e.g. Swedish has [!] or [#/+where
other languages have [u], for example Swedish [k!&0'*&#:] 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,
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.
201
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.
6.6 Test of cross language interpretation of 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
202
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 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')
203
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).
'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'
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'.
204
'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')
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')
205
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'.
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')
206
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'
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
tional
answer
category
6
2
6
7
4
5
30
4
6
5
5
2
3
25
5
0
2
1
7
1
15
207
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.
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
208
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. non-European.9
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
9
number of
words
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
These results are very preliminary and clearly a larger investigation is needed.
209
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 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.
210
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.
211
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.
212
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.
213
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-, vr-,
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-, sl-, 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).
Test procedure
214
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 – from meaning to
phonological (graphic) form
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.
215
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
216
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:
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'
2i.e.
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)
3 of the 3 wetness words were identified by most subjects.
217
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 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
3The
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.
218
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.
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-)
219
The questions that did not give the expected results concerned the forms
and meanings in table 7.6 (for a majority of speakers).
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
comment
features
'talking' instead of 'light' This is in fact more
expectable according to
the analysis in 4.5
'long thin form' instead This is also expectable.
of 'quick or strong
There might be an
movement'
influence from the 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'
220
The semantic feature which is the least successful is 'light' (for gn-, gl- and
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, 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.
221
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)
pratig
(chatty)
arg
(angry)
vrängd
(turned
inside out)
rörig
(messy)
mosig
(fuddled)
krokig
(crooked)
pjåskig
(mawkish)
ojämn
(uneven)
plaskig
(splashy)
kantig
(angular)
knyckig
(jerky)
smal
(narrow)
blöt
(wet)
kaxig
(cocky)
schlagermusik
(popular
song)
flamsig
(silly)
galen
(crazy)
blöt
(wet)
grov
(coarse)
tjatig
(nagging)
skrytsam
(boastful)
222
något kantigt
och blött
(sth angular
and wet)
skvalande
(pouring)
något svårt
(sth difficult)
skrumpen
(shrunk)
pratsam
tråkig
(talkative
boring)
tjatig
(nagging)
kantig eller
hård
(angular or
hard)
skratta
(laugh)
knölig
(knobbly)
arg
(angry)
frysa
(freeze)
vrida
(wring)
halvdålig*4
(half bad)
knäpp*
tokrolig*
(crazy
funny)
halvnerriven
vägreklam*
(half torn
down
advertizement by the
road side)
inkrökt
(focused on
one´s own
problems)
urgröpt
(hollowed
out)
berusad
(drunk)
krånglig
(troublesome)
försupen*
(sottish)
besvärlig
(troublesome)
vissen
(withered)
fånig
(ridiculous)
full med
revor
(full of rips)
trasig
(ragged)
liten
rar
(small
sweet)
passande
(suitable)
löjlig*
liten*
(ridiculous
small)
skrattande
(laughing)
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.
4The
* marks the answers from the subject who deviated most in the "matching test of
nonsense words and meanings" (see 7.1.5).
223
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
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
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).
224
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.
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
6The
* marks the answers from the subject who deviated most in the "matching test of
nonsense words and meanings" (see 7.1.5).
225
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 fj- are
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 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
226
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).
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 tr- and
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.
227
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.
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.
228
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'. Tl- breaks
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'
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.
229
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').
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 test of nonsense words and meanings
7The
absolute frequencies of these features, for the initial clusters, are shown in table 4.2.
column of words is e.g. slirv, islig, plyr, ril, pis, sjling, siloln, krel, kril, vrinlig, tirori,
slio, evans, vrom.
8One
230
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.
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.
231
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
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-),
9There
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.
232
'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
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
233
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.
Table 7.9 The phonesthemes most successfully interpreted or coded in
experiments with neologisms.
Test:
Phone-
forced
choice
from
meaning to
phonol. form
forced
choice from
phonol. form
to meaning
free
production
from
meaning to
phonol. form
234
free
matching test
production
from phonol.
form to
meaning
stheme:
most
successful
phonesthemes
pejorative:
fjdryness:
fnlong thin
form:
strwetness:
spbad mood:
vrpejorative:
pj-
least
light:
success- gnful
phonesthemes
hollow form:
grdryness:
fntalking:
snpejorative:
pjquick or
strong
movement:
skseparation:
sprlight:
gnlight:
gl-
pejorative
(several
clusters)
bad mood
(several
clusters)
wetness
(several
clusters)
pejorative:
pj-
rough
surface
structure vs.
soft
consistency:
skr- vs mjpejorative
vs.
bad mood:
fj- vs. vr-
winding
form,
dryness,
rough
surface
winding
form:
kr-
-
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 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.
235
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?
236
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.
237
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'. The first six
features are also the six most common features of initial clusters, cf. table
8.1 (cf. also table 5.4).
238
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.
239
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 three-consonant 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.
Most clusters that are percentally most frequent are lexically very
infrequent ones, cf. discussion in 8.3.
240
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 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).
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.
241
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 [!]
seems to have the meanings of 'low pitch' and 'largeness'. [a] seems neutral.
The vowel [!] 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.
8.1.2 Question 2
242
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 gl-, gn-, bl-,
are not productive, unlike phonesthemes such as kl- or pj-. Even when the
243
'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 jclusters, among others, for 'pejorative' were produced as expected. The rclusters 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 p-clusters 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
244
analysis) were 'pejorative' (163), 'bad mood' (18) and 'wetness' (63). Less
successfully expressed were 'winding form' (20), 'dryness' (1) 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
245
meanings based on constructed neologisms (and therefore had no
expectancies as to what the answers ought to be) produced meanings
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
4This
is a question for further experiments, e.g. lexical decision experiments, and
development of on line models.
246
different surfaces give different 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
247
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.
Interpretation of other sound symbolism often goes wrong (because
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.
248
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
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- (cf.
movement,
sp-, spj-
diagram 4.1)
wetness,
quick or strong
talking, light,
movement:
in %:
diminutive,
fl-
fn-, gn-, skv-,
round form,
wetness:
pj-, kn-, spr-,
walking (cf.
sl-, skv-10
spj-, gl-, mj-,
diagram 4.5)
vr- (cf.
diagram 4.4)
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.
10From table 4.8.
8In
249
final consonant
quick or strong
-Nk, -sk,-fs, -
sound,
clusters
movement: -Nl,
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,
-Nl 12
long thin form,
wetness13
long thin form Nk11
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
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
11From
tables 5.3 and 5.18.
NFO4, diagram 5.2 (except for the 1 root clusters).
13From NFO4 and Svensk Baklängesordbok, section 5.5.3.
14The semantic feature 'sound' was not tested.
15From 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.
12From
250
free production
pejorative: fl-,
meaning to
fj-
expression
bad mood: rclusters
wetness: sl-, sv19
cross
fl20-: quick or
quick or strong
cultural
strong
movement21
interpreta-
movement
tion
skr- :
destruction
tr-: bad mood
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.
18From
table 7.7.
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.
22Cf. also table 4.8.
19From
251
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 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
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.
252
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), 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
253
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-, spland 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
otherwise non-existent in the language (wild forms) occur in onomatopoeic
and sound symbolic neologisms.
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
254
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
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
24
There also exist, on a lexical level, meaning extensions from sensory modalities to
mental phenomena (see Abelin, 1988).
255
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.
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.
256
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
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'.
257
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 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:
Sound
Talking
Beat
Movement
Quick or strong movement
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.
258
Light:
Surface structure:
Consistency:
(Plasticity)
Wetness:
Dryness:
Attitude:
Slang:
Jocular:
Pejorative:
Mental feeling:
Bodily feeling:
Separation:
Putting together:
Diminutive:
Augmentative:
Form:
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
Putting together
Diminutive
Augmentative
Form
Round form
Short-wide form
Thin form
Hollow form
Winding form
Long thin form
259
Narrow form
Small end form
Bent form
Iterative
Fine grain
Iterative:
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.
meaning
'pejorative
'
'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'
in
freq.
Nl
freq.
in %
%
4
Nl,
dr, lr
40,
25,
260
'talking'
tr, bl
5, 4
dr, bl
'sound'
st, sl,
lr, tr
fs,
sk,
ms
sk
Nk,
lk
5 ,4,
4, 4
10,
5, 4
lr, sl
'pejorative'
'wetness'
'long thin form'
8
7, 4
fs,
ms,
dr
-
22
25,
24
44,
27
59,
27,
25
-
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.
261
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 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.
262
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
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
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,
Springer-Verlag. 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
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
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 and phrases (1977) Penguin Books.
Harmondsworth. Middlesex
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
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,
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. 157-159
Wisseman, H. (1954) Untersuchungen zur Onomatopoie,
sprachpsychologischen Versuche, Winter. Heidelberg
Part
I:
Die
Appendix 1
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
drasut
dratta
dravel
nedsättande
slarv, fumlig
struntprat
pejorative
falling, pejorative
talking, pejorative
Sida 1
Appendix 1
dregel
dribbla
drill
droppa
drulle
drummel
dråsa
drägg
drälla
drämma
dröse
drösa
saliv, oavsiktligt
rörelser
ton
falla
ohyfsat, vårdslöst
klumpigt, vårdslöst
falla klumpigt
botten, slödder
planlöst, vårdslöst, förflytta
slå hårt
osorterad, ostrukturerad mängd
falla, tätt, okontrollerat
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
flyta
flytta
flåsa
fläkta
flämta
flänga
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
transporteras
till annan plats
tungt snabbt
blåsa
snabbt häftigt
rusa framochtillbaka hetsigt
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
q or s movement
q or s movement
q or s movement
q or s movement
q or s movement
q or s movement
Sida 2
Appendix 1
flöda
flöjel
flöjt
rinna stor mängd
vindriktning lätt skiva
ton luftström skarp kant
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
glisa
glissando
glittra
glo
glob
glop
glopp
gloria
glosögd
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
lysa
glida ton
lysa starkt snabbt
stirra dumt
klotformig
slyngel
snö regn
ljus
ögon
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
light
sound, smooth surface
light
gaze
form
pejorative
wetness
light
gaze
Sida 3
Appendix 1
glosa
glufsa
glugg
glunkas
glupa
glupsk
glutta
glytt
glåmig
glåpord
gläfs
glänsa
glänta
glöd
glo
mycket ovårdat
liten
sägas skvaller
glupskt
nedsätt
titta
barnunge
blek
förolämpande yttrande
svagt hundskall
sken blank
mindre öppen
sken
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 movement
pejorative
sound
light
light
smooth surface str, q or s movement
sound
talking
smooth surface str, q or s movement
diminutive
talking
sound
sound
talking
gramse
grav
grift
groll
grop
grotta
grubba
grubbla
gruff
grumlig
grummel
grums
grumsa
grunka
grym
grymta
gryt
gråta
gräla
gräll
arg irriterad
grävd hålighet i marken
grav
ovänskap
djup hålighet
håltum
grop
dyster
gräl
ogenomskinlig oönskad
grums
oönskad
klagomål
föremål vard
samvetslöst tillfogar lidande
ljud
jordhåla
röst
högljudd respektlös diskussion
syn alltför starkt
bad mood
hollow form
hollow form
bad mood
hollow form
hollow form
hollow form
bad mood
bad mood, talking
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative
pejorative, talking
slang
bad mood
talking
hollow form
talking
bad mood, talking
light, pejorative
Sida 4
Appendix 1
gräma
gräslig
gräva
gröpa
oönskad
stark olust
djupare grop
gräva mindre hål
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
kludda
klump
klunk
kluns
klåpa
klämta
klänga
kläpp
klätt
klättra
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
dålig slarvig
oformligt större stycke
vätska
klumpig
dålig slarvig
ringa
hålla kvar
ljud, klump
liten topp
fästpunkt
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
pejorative
shortwide form
wetness
pejorative
pejorative
sound
adhesion
sound, shortwide form
shortwide form
adhesion
knacka
knackig
knagg
knaggla
upprepade slag lystring
dålig
pinne
röra sig
sound
pejorative
round form
walking
Sida 5
Appendix 1
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
knorva
knot
knota
knota
knott
knottra
knubbig
knuff
knut
knutte
knyck
knyckla
knyppla
knyst
knyta
knåp
knäck
knäppa
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
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
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
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
Sida 6
Appendix 1
knödel
knöl
knöl
knös
bulle
mindre rundad
otrevlig
nedsätt
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
krossa
kruka
krulla
krum
krumbukt
krumelur
krumpen
krusa
kruserlig
krusiduller
krusta
krustad
krycka
krylla
krypa
krysta
kråka
kråma
krångel
krås
kräk
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
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
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
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
Sida 7
Appendix 1
kräkla
kräla
kräm
krämta
kränga
kräpp
krök
inrullat krön
förflytta sig slingrande
tjockflytande
harkla
vickande rörelser
tunt krusig yta
kraftig sväng
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
mjuk
mjäkig
mjäla
mjäll
mjäll
mjöl
läte
angenäm känsel jämn slät
alltför vek
mjölfin
fin konsistens
fjäll
finmald
sound
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
klumpigt ljudligt fall
oavbrutet innehållslöst prat
stor utbredning oönskad
fyrsidigt stycke
häftigt vatten ljud
ytor
kort spetsigt stift
ljud
lådformigt avsmalnande
sound
talking
pejorative
form
sound, wetness
form
form, diminutive
sound
form
Sida 8
Appendix 1
plira
plissé
plit
ploj
plomb
plottra
plufsig
plugg
plump
plump
plums
plundra
plunta
pluring
plurr
plussig
plutt
plym
plymå
plysa
plysch
plätt
plös
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
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
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
lura
ljud
tal
mycket liten rundad platt
portion
småtokig
föremål täppa hål öppning
envist kräva
lysande färger
övertala
fjärt
grovt nålformigt
onyttig överflödig
pejorative
sound
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
strålande
liten trång
tvivelaktigt knep
vard.
vard
rörelse
stång
hårt tunt hölje
hård kant
läte
ljuda starkt
hårdhet
ljud
avlång rörlig
rak
Sida 9
Appendix 1
skalv
skare
skarp
skava
skavank
skippa
skopa
skorpa
skorr
skorvig
skorv
skott
skovel
skångra
skåra
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
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
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
gammal utsliten
vard.
dålig
dålig svag
ljud
ostadig
ljud
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
destruction
slang
pejorative
destruction
sound
destruction
sound
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
Sida 10
Appendix 1
skvätt
liten mängd vätska
wetness
slabba
slabbertacka
slack
sladd
sladda
sladdra
sladdrig
slafs
slag
slak
slam
slammer
slampa
slams
slamsa
slana
slang
slank
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
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
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
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
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
Sida 11
Appendix 1
sluring
slurk
slusk
sluss
slutta
slyna
slyngel
slå
släde
slägga
slänga
slänt
släntra
slät
slätt
slö
slödder
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
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
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
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
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
Sida 12
Appendix 1
snabb
snabel
snacka
snafs
snagga
snappa
snar
snarka
snarpa
snarra
snaskig
snatta
snattra
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
quickness
long thin form
talking
pejorative
small end form
quickness
quickness
sound
sound
sound
wetness, pejorative
pejorative
sound
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
mycket lång utdragen
prata
smuts
mycket kort
kort snabb rörelse
snabb
ljud
läte
skorra
sölig kladdig
mindre värde
läte
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
Sida 13
Appendix 1
snäppa
snärj
snärp
snärt
snärta
snäsa
snöd
snöpa
snöre
snörvla
ljud
högt tempo
fågelläte
ända slag
nedsätt
irriterad tillrättavisning
fåfäng tarvlig
stumpa, vanställa
garn
ljud
sound
quickness
sound
beat
pejorative
talking
pejorative
pejorative
long thin form
sound
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
vatten
avlångt
ouppfostrad
wetness
long thin form
pejorative
Sida 14
Appendix 1
spont
spotsk
spott
utstående parti
hånfullhet
vätska
long thin form
attitude
wetness
spurt
sputum
spydig
spån
spång
späd
spänta
spö
ökning av farten
slem
elaka kommentarer
tunn avhyvlad bit
smal
liten
stickor
smal böjlig käpp
q or s movement
wetness
attitude, talking
thin form
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
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 smalt
långt
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
kort kraftig
lång käpp
tala stötigt
stöta hårt ljudligt
gå ostadig
short form
long thin form
talking, iterative
sound, iterative
walking
Sida 15
Appendix 1
stav
stepp
stick
sticka
stift
stig
stilett
stim
sting
stint
stirra
stirrig
stock
stoft
stoj
stolle
stolpe
långt smalt
ljudliga slag
smärtsamt vass
tunn vass flisa
smalt spetsigt
smal
stickvapen smal
ljud röster
smärtsam vass
blick
titta
upprörd virrig
stam
små partiklar
högljutt prat
tok
påle
long thin form
sound, beat
bodily feeling
long thin form
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
rak stel
spänd
långsmal remsa
kortare linje
töjbar
läderrem
ljud av vätska
liten långsmal bit
långsmalt band ljus
rak hårtest
stiffness
stiffness
long thin
long thin
long thin
long thin
long thin
long thin
long thin
long thin
Sida 16
form
form
form
form
form, sound, wetness
form
form, light
form
Appendix 1
stropp
strosa
strul
strunt
strut
strutta
strå
stråk
stråle
stråt
sträcka
sträng
sträv
strö
ström
strössel
ströva
ögleformad
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
round form
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
tredsk
trilla
långtråkig
ständig tröttsam upprepning
rörelse
dumt prat
sönderrivet
gå vårdslöst klumpigt
virrvarr krångel
strutformig pip tratt
röra sig
envis ovillighet
falla
pejorative
pejorative
walking
pejorative, talking
destruction
walking, pejorative
pejorative
long thin form
walking
bad mood
falling
Sida 17
Appendix 1
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
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
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 form
vrak
vrede
vrensk
vresig
vret
vricka
vrida
vrål
vrång
vräka
vräkig
vränga
vrövel
skadat odugligt
stark känsla förorättad
själsligt motsträvig
ovänlig missnöje
liten
kraftigt vrida
runt rörelse
skrik
sur motsträvig
handlöst kasta
överdrivet
vända fel
struntprat
destruction
bad mood
bad mood
bad mood
diminutive
q or s movement
q or s movement
talking
bad mood
q or s movement
pejorative
pejorative
talking, pejorative
Sida 18
Appendix 1
Sida 19
Appendix 1
Sida 20
Appendix 1
Sida 21
Appendix 1
r, q or s movement
r, q or s movement
r, q or s movement
Sida 22
Appendix 1
Sida 23
Appendix 1
Sida 24
Appendix 1
Sida 25
Appendix 1
Sida 26
Appendix 1
Sida 27
Appendix 1
Sida 28
Appendix 1
Sida 29
Appendix 1
Sida 30
Appendix 1
Sida 31
Appendix 1
Sida 32
Appendix 1
Sida 33
Appendix 1
und, wetness
Sida 34
Appendix 1
Sida 35
Appendix 1
ong thin form
Sida 36
Appendix 2
Some interjections for 9 different languages. (Swedish and English are written in ordinary orthography)
'Pejorative'
Swedish
usch
hu
"t" [|]
blä
ha
håhå (jaja)
tvi
öh
äh
bah
asch
äsch
isch
uh
urrk
fy
bu
tss
Icelandic
[Oj]
[Ojbjak:]
[u:]
English
oh
pooh
phew
ugh
ooh
tut [|]
boo
'positive' (appreciation, joy etc)
Swedish
Icelandic
English
Polish
[O]
[Oj]
[ox]
Hungarian
[o:]
[u:]
[jOj]
[juj]
[fui]
[|]+gesture
Finnish
[h¨i]
[h¨h¨h]
[hui]
[|]
[uœk]
whistle
Ososo
[fjO]
[pçO]
[œh]
Malagasi
[dE] (nasal
E)
[ts]
whistle
Slovenian
[fOI]
[fEI]
Polish
Hungarian
Finnish
Ososo
Malagasi
Slovenian
tjo(hej)
ah
åh
haha(ha)
hihi(hi)
m:
'surprise'
Swedish
oj
åh
ä
åhå
hoppsan
[vau]
[jipiO]
oh
ah
wow
yippee
[O]
[m:]
[oh]
[ah]
kissing sound [m:]
+ gesture
[jip:i]
[|]
[ah]
sigh
-
-
Icelandic
[ha]
English
oh
ah
whoops
Polish
[O:]
Hungarian
[je:]
[o:]
[h¨]
Finnish
[o:]
[m:]
Ososo
[Ou]
[aj]
Malagasi
[a]
Slovenian
[Oho:]
(positive)
[Ox]
[O:]
[OI]
(negative)
[jOI]
(negative)
Polish
[Ox]
[O]
Hungarian
[au]
[jaj]
[juj]
[br:]
Finnish
[aj]
Ososo
[Ou]
[euo:]
Malagasi
[aj]
Slovenian
[aIs]
[ux]
shivering
sound
shivering
sound
-
-
-
[hm]
-
-
-
'other bodily and mental feeling'
Swedish
Icelandic
English
aj
[aj]
oh
('pain')
[Ou]
ow
[au]
ouch
brr
[ı] (voiceless) brrh
burr
ugh
('freezing')
hm
hm:
hm
('thoughtm:
[ahem]
fulness')
[O]
[Oj]
[br:]
[hm]
åhej('åhå')
hm (ingress('joint effort') ive)
[nu]
puh
[F]
pust
[´f:]
('exhaustsighs
ion')
ojojoj
[ajE]
vojvoj
håhåjaja
('complaining')
aha
('sudden
insight')
iiih
inhalation
('fear')
atjo
[at!Cu:]
('sneeze')
mums
[m:]
namnam
[nam]
m:
[namEnamE]
('good taste')
grr
[gr:]
('anger')
[Oh] (with
coarse voice)
'commands to animals'
Swedish
Icelandic
-
-
-
-
work songs
-
-
phew
[ux]
[´:]
[h¨]
[huhuh]
expiration
-
-
-
-
-
-
[euo:]
[Oia]
-
-
aha
haha
oho
-
-
[aha]
[jOj]
-
[aha:]
-
[aha:]
-
-
[h¨i]
silence
-
[Ox]
atishoo
[apCik]
[haptsi]
-
[itC!imi]
-
yummy
[njamnjam]
-
[m:]
smacking
noise
-
-
-
-
-
maybe
imitation of
animal
[a!tCix]
[tCixah]
[m:] (with
rising intonation)
[n´mn´m]
swearing
English
Polish
Hungarian
Finnish
Ososo
Malagasi
Slovenian
schas
('go away')
[S:]
shoo
+gesture
[tvi:tvi:]
[hOuhOu] (to
sheep)
[S:]
[hœS] (to
insects)
[Sits]
[S:]
[Cu:]
[uS:]
pull pull
(to hens)
('come here')
[gibagiba
gib]
(voiceless
[b]) (to
sheep)
[putaputaput]
(to hens)
-
-
-
-
-
[pC:]
(common
command to
several
animals
"march")
-
English
now now
no no
naughty
naughty
Polish
[njE] (=no)
Hungarian
Finnish
[œlœ] (verb
negation)
Ososo
[kai]
Malagasi
Slovenian
sh
[tC:]
-
whistling
[S:]
gesture
+gesture
[pst] (in play) family name
[EnE]=you
pst or
whistling (to
prostitute)
[S:]
here
hey
[tCit]
[kuS:]
[he:]
[e]
-
'commands to people'
Swedish
Icelandic
jaja
[fOs:]
aja(baja)
[svei]
ajaj
[sveiDr]
(mild
warning to
children)
sch
[¨s˘]
(be quiet)
pst
[hai]
(soft call for [¨u] (=du)
attention)
bu
(to scare
somebody)
vyss vyss
lull lull
(putting sb to
sleep)
ohoj
hoho
(louder call
for attention)
[ba]
boo
[bu:]
[bux]
[hu]
[bu]
[b¨]
[dja]
[bi¨mbi¨m]
[s¨s¨˘s¨s¨˘]
singing
hushaby
-
-
-
[S:] (quietly)
[¨u] (=du)
[a] (coarse
voice)
[´] (coarse
voice)
-
[EwE] (not to _
adults)
[Ei]
-
-
-