Cover not available
Part of
Dimensions of Iconicity
Edited by Angelika Zirker, Matthias Bauer, Olga Fischer and Christina Ljungberg
[Iconicity in Language and Literature 15] 2017
► pp. 15–38

Iconic treadmill hypothesis

The reasons behind continuous onomatopoeic coinage

 | St. Petersburg State Electrotechnical University ‘LETI’
The paper deals with the process of iconicity loss and touches upon the enigma of iconic words’ continuous and persistent appearance in languages all over the globe. The hypothesis introduced aims at explaining the reasons behind the never-ceasing iconic coinage. The paper also presents a universal four-step model of iconicity loss.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The iconic treadmill hypothesis
  • 3.The iconic lexicon: Some explanatory notes on onomatopoeia, sound symbolism, phonesthemes, and ideophones
    • 3.1Onomatopoeic words
    • 3.2Sound symbolic words
    • 3.3Phonesthemic sound symbolism
    • 3.4Ideophones
  • 4.The de-iconization process
    • 4.1De-iconization of form
    • 4.2De-iconization of meaning
    • 4.3Stages of de-iconization
  • 5.Rates of de-iconization and new iconic coinage: The iconic treadmill
  • 6.The driving force for the iconic treadmill
  • Abbreviations
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 September 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.15.02fla
References (78)
References
Abelin, Å. 1999. Studies in Sound Symbolism. Göteborg: Göteborg University Press.Google Scholar
Afanasiev, A. 1984. Voprosy semanticheskoi evolutsii leksiki: Na materiale angliiskix zvukopodrazhatelnih suschestvitelnikh (Aspects of Vocabulary Semantic Evolution: A Study of English Imitative Words). PhD dissertation, University of Leningrad.Google Scholar
Allan, K. & Burridge, K. 1991. Euphemism and Dysphemism: Language Used as Shield and Weapon. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Alpher, B. 1994. Yir-Yiront ideophones. In Hinton, Nichols & Ohala (eds), 161–178.Google Scholar
Anderson, E. 1998. A Grammar of Iconism. London: Associated University Press.Google Scholar
Avetian, E. G. 1968. Priroda lingvisticheckogo znaka (The Nature of Linguistic Signs). Yerevan: Mitk.Google Scholar
Ayto, J. 2000. The Dictionary of Euphemisms. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Bartens, A. 2000. Ideophones and Sound Symbolism in Atlantic Creoles. Helsinki: Gummerus Printing Saarjärvi.Google Scholar
Bohnhoff, L. E. 1982. Yag Dii (Duru) ideophones. Cahier du Département des Langues et Linguistiques, Université de Yaounde 2: 1–14.Google Scholar
Bratus, I. B. 1976. Akusticheskie onomatopi v indoneziiiskom jazike (Acousic Onomatopoes in Indonesian). PhD dissertation, University of Leningrad.
Brodovich, O. I. 2008. Zvukoizobrazitelnost i zvukovie zakony (Iconicity and Sound Changes). In Yazik-Soznanie-Kultura-Sozium, 485–489. Saratov: Nauka.Google Scholar
Brunner, K. 1950. Die Englische Sprache: Ihre Geschichtliche Entwicklung. Halle (Saale): Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Campbell, L. & Kaufman, T. 1983. Mesoamerican historical linguistics and distant genetic relationship: Getting it straight. American Anthropologist 85(2): 362–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Childs, G. T. 1994. African ideophones. In Hinton, Nichols & Ohala (eds), 178–207.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. 1987. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Cuskley, C. & Kirby, S. 2013. Synesthesia, cross-modality, and language evolution. In Oxford Handbook of Synesthesia, J. Simner (ed.), 869–899. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Diffloth, G. 1994. i: big, a: small. In Hinton, Nichols & Ohala (eds), 107–114.Google Scholar
Dingemanse, M., Blasi, D. E., Lupyan, G., Christiansen, M. K. & Monaghan, P. 2015. Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 19 (10): 603–615. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dingemanse, M. In press. Expressiveness and system integration: On the typology of ideophones, with special reference to Siwu. STUF – Language Typology and Universals 70(2): 119–141.
Doke, C. M. 1935. Bantu Linguistic Terminology. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Durkin, P. 2009. The Oxford Guide to Etymology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Elders, S. 2001. Defining ideophones in Mundang. In Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz (eds), 97–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, A. 1999. What, if anything, is phonological iconicity? In Form Miming Meaning [Iconicity in Language and Literature 1], M. Nänny & O. Fischer (eds.), 123–134. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fivaz, D. 1963. The ideophone as a phonosemantic class: The case of Yoruba. Current Approaches to African Linguistics 1: 263–278.Google Scholar
Flaksman, M. 2013. Preservation of long vowels in onomatopoeic words denoting pure tones: Phonosemantic inertia. In The Proceedings of the Joseph M. Tronsky XVII Memorial Annual International Conference Indo-European Comparative Linguistics and Classical Philology in the Institute for Linguistic Studies of Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, N. N. Kazanskii (ed.), 917–923. St. Petersburg: Nauka.Google Scholar
. 2015a. Diachronicheskoye razvitie zvuloizobrazitelnoi leksiki angliiskogo yazika (Diachronic Development of English Iconic Vocabulary). PhD dissertation, University of St. Petersburg.
. 2015b. Onomatopoeic words in Gothic: Iconic elements in Wulfila’s translation of the New Testament. In The Proceedings of the 23. Linguistik- und Literaturtage in St. Petersburg, Russland: Die Sprachen Mitteleuropas und darüber hinaus. Internationale Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für Sprache und Sprachen (GeSuS) 22.–24 Juni 2015 , 9–10. St. Petersburg.
Gazov-Ginsberg, А. М. 1965. Byl li yazik zvukoizobrazitelen v svoich istokah? (Was the Language Iconic in its Origin?). Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Hinton, L., Nichols J. & Ohala, J. J. (eds). 1994. Sound Symbolism. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Hock, H. H. 1986. Principles of Historical Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. & Waugh, L. R. 1979. The Sound Shape of Language. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. 1933. Symbolic value of the vowel i. In Linguistica: Selected Papers in English, French and German, O. Jespersen (ed.), 283–303. Copenhagen: Levin and Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Joseph, B. D. 1997. On the iconic elements in etymological investigation. Diachronica 4(1): 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kakehi, H. 1982. Onomatopoeic expressions in Japanese and English. In Proceedings of the 13th International Congress of Linguistics, Tokyo , 29 Aug. – 4 Sept. 1982. Tokyo. 913–918.
Kankia, N. D. 1988. Primarnaya motivirovannost slova: na materiale angliiskogo i grizinskogo yazikov (The Primary Motivation of the Word: In English and Georgian). PhD dissertation, University of Leningrad.
Kaufman, T. 1994. Symbolism and change in sound system of Huastec. In Hinton, Nichols & Ohala (eds), 63–75.
Klima, E. S. & Bellugi, U. 1979. The Signs of Language. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kozlova, T. 2013. Iconically expressible meanings in proto-Indo-European roots and their reflexes in daughter branches. In Iconic Investigations [Iconicity in Language & Literature 12], L. Ellenström, O. Fischer & C. Ljungberg (eds), 311–330. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kunene, D. P. 2001. Speaking the act: The ideophone as a linguistic rebel. In Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz (eds), 183–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuzmich, I. V. 1993. Zvukoizobrazitelnost i amerikanskii sleng: fonosemanticheskii analiz. (Iconicity in American Slang: A Phonosemantic Analysis). PhD dissertation, University of St. Petersburg.
Lapkina, L. Z. 1979. Angliiskie i bashkirskie akusticheskie onomatopi (English and Bashkir Acoustic Onomatopes). PhD Dissertation, University of Leningrad.
Levitskii, V. V. 2000. Etimologicheskii slovar germanskikh yazykov (An Etymological Dictionary of Germanic Languages). Chernovtsi: Ruta.Google Scholar
Liberman, A. 2010. Iconicity and etymology. In Signergy [Iconicity in Language and Literature 9], J. Conradie, R. Johl, M. Beukes, O. Fischer & C. Ljungberg (eds), 243–258. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Likhomanova, L. F. 1986. Semanticheskaya filiatsia angliiskikh glagolov dvizheniya (Semantic Filiantion of English Verbs Denoting Movement). PhD dissertation, University of Leningrad.
Lühr, R. 1988. Expressivität und Lautgesetz im Germanischen. Heidelberg: Karl Winter.Google Scholar
Malkiel, Y. 1990. Diachronic Problems in Phonosymbolism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malmberg, B. 1963. Structural Linguistics and Human Communication. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marchand, H. 1959. Phonetic symbolism in English word-formation. Indogermanische Forschungen 64(2): 146–168; (3): 256–267.Google Scholar
Mazanaev, I. A. 1985. Osnovnie gruppy zvukosimvolicheskih slov: fonosemanticheskii analiz: na materiale angliiskogo i lesginskogo yazykov (The Main Groups of English and Lezgin Iconic Words). PhD dissertation, University of Leningrad.Google Scholar
McGregor, W. 2001. Ideophones as the source of verbs in nothern Australian languages. In Voeltz & C. Kilian-Hatz (eds), 205–222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meier, H. 1999. Imagination by ideophones. In Form Miming Meaning [Iconicity in Language and Literarure 1], M. Nänny & O. Fischer (eds), 135–154. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mikone, E. 2001. Ideophones in the Balto-Finnic languages. In K. Voeltz & C. Kilian-Hatz (eds), 223–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, F. M. 1864. Lectures on the Science of Language delivered at the Royal Institution in February, March, April and May, 1863, 2nd series. London: Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts and Green.Google Scholar
Newman, P. 2001. Are ideophones really as weird and extra-systematic as linguists make them out to be? In K. Voeltz & C. Kilian-Hatz (eds), 251–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, F. J. 1992. Iconicity and generative grammar. Language 68(4): 756–796. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Onions, C. T. 2002. The Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Paul, H. 1886. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Petukhova, E. V. 2002. Morphologicheskoe i konversionnoe slovoobrazovanie on zvukopodrazhatelnikh osnov v angliiskom yazike (Conversion and Morphological Derivation from English Onomatopoeic Words). PhD dissertation, University of St. Petersburg.
Pinker, S. 1994. The game of the name. The New York Times. 〈[URL]〉 (16 September 2016).Google Scholar
Pokorny, J. 2005. Indogermanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar
Sadowski, P. 2001. The sound as an echo to the sense. The iconicity of English gl- words. In The Motivated Sign [Iconicity in Language and Literature 2], M. Nänny & O. Fischer (eds), 69–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Samarin, W. J. 1979. Simplification, pidginisation, and language change. In Readings in Creole Studies, I. F. Hancock, (ed.), 55–68. Ghent: Story-Scientia. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Saussure, F. 1916. Cours de linguistique générale. Lausanne and Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Schultze-Berndt, E. 2001. Ideophone-like characteristics of uninflected predicates in Jaminjung (Australia). In K. Voeltz & C. Kilian-Hatz (eds), 355–374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shliakhova, S. S. 1991. Tipi i funktsii onomatopov v russkoi rechi (Types and Functions of Onomatopes in Russian Speech). PhD dissertation, University of Leningrad.
Skeat, W. W. 2006. An Etymological Dictionary of the English Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Slonitskaya, E. I. 1987. Zvukosimvolizm oboznachenii okruglogo: Opyt tipologicheskogo issledovaniya (Iconicity of Roundness: A Typological Comparison). PhD dissertation, University of Leningrad.
Smithers, G. V. 1954. Some English ideophones. Archivum Linguistikum 6(2): 73–111.Google Scholar
Taylor, K. J. 2007. KA-BOOM! A Dictionary of Comic Book Words, Symbols and Onomatopoeia. Surrey BC: Mora Publications.Google Scholar
The Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd edn. Oxford: OUP.
Veldi, E. A. 1988. Anglo-estonskie paralleli v onomatopee (English-Estonian Parallels in Onomatopoeia). PhD dissertation, University of Tartu.
Voeltz, F. K. E. & Kilian-Hatz, C. (eds). 2001. Ideophones [Typological Studies in Language 44]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Voronin, S. V. 1969. Angliiskie onomatopi: Tipy i stroenie (English Onomatopoes: Types and Structure). PhD dissertation, University of Leningrad.
. 1997. Phonosemantica i etimologia (Phonosemantics and Etymology). In Diahkronicheskaya Germanistica: Collected Papers, 131–164. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg University Press.Google Scholar
. 1998. Angliiskie onomatopi: fonosemanticheskaya klassifikatsiya (English Onomatopes: A Phonosemantic Classification). St. Petersburg: IFL.Google Scholar
. 2005. Iconicity. Glottogenesis. Semiosis: Sundry Papers. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg University Press.Google Scholar
. 2006. Osnovy Phonosemantiki (The Fundamentals of Phonosemantics). Moscow: Lenand.Google Scholar
Wescott, R. W. 1980. Sound and Sense. Linguistic Essays on Phonosemic Subjects. Lake Bluff IL: Jupiter Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (13)

Cited by 13 other publications

Farina, Mael
2024. Groaning and grunting: Investigating sound correspondences in the English lexicon. Lexis :23 DOI logo
Körtvélyessy, Lívia
2024. In search of a semiotic model for onomatopoeia. Folia Linguistica 58:3 ► pp. 783 ff. DOI logo
Odiegwu, Nancy Chiagolum & Jesús Romero-Trillo
2024. Gradience in iconicity. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 22:1 ► pp. 124 ff. DOI logo
Smith, Chris A.
2024. Rah-rah! Investigating the variation in phonosemantic motivation in a set of iconic nouns expressing the concept <. Lexis :23 DOI logo
Barnes, Kathryn & Cornelia Ebert
2023. The information status of iconic enrichments: modelling gradient at-issueness. Theoretical Linguistics 49:3-4 ► pp. 167 ff. DOI logo
Джафарова Самира, Рамиз кызы & Ткачева, Любовь Олеговна
2023. Russian iconic words visual perception, taking into account the neurocognitive profile. Tomsk state pedagogical university bulletin :4(144) ► pp. 7 ff. DOI logo
Nielsen, Alan KS & Mark Dingemanse
2021. Iconicity in Word Learning and Beyond: A Critical Review. Language and Speech 64:1 ► pp. 52 ff. DOI logo
Silva-Júnior, Daltro Roque Carvalho & André Nogueira Xavier
2021. A iconicidade como uma característica universal das línguas. Revista da ABRALIN ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Winter, Bodo & Marcus Perlman
2021. Iconicity ratings really do measure iconicity, and they open a new window onto the nature of language. Linguistics Vanguard 7:1 DOI logo
Флаксман, Мария Алексеевна, Седёлкина, Юлия Георгиевна & Коротаевская, Елизавета Александровна
2021. PSYCHOSEMANTIC INVESTIGATION OF VISUAL PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH ICONIC WORDS DEPENDING ON DE-ICONIZATION STAGE. Pedagogical Review :1(35) ► pp. 122 ff. DOI logo
Erben Johansson, Niklas, Andrey Anikin, Gerd Carling & Arthur Holmer
2020. The typology of sound symbolism: Defining macro-concepts via their semantic and phonetic features. Linguistic Typology 24:2 ► pp. 253 ff. DOI logo
Flaksman, Maria
2020. Pathways of de-iconization. In Operationalizing Iconicity [Iconicity in Language and Literature, 17], ► pp. 76 ff. DOI logo
Flaksman, Maria
2022. Echoes of the past. In Iconicity in Cognition and across Semiotic Systems [Iconicity in Language and Literature, 18], ► pp. 331 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.