Chapter published in:
Ideophones, Mimetics and Expressives
Edited by Kimi Akita and Prashant Pardeshi
[Iconicity in Language and Literature 16] 2019
► pp. 13–33

‘Ideophone’ as a comparative concept

| Radboud University | Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics
This chapter makes the case for ‘ideophone’ as a comparative concept: a notion that captures a recurrent typological pattern and provides a template for understanding language-specific phenomena that prove similar. It revises an earlier definition to account for the observation that ideophones typically form an open lexical class, and uses insights from canonical typology to explore the larger typological space. According to the resulting definition, a canonical ideophone is a member of an open lexical class of marked words that depict sensory imagery. The five elements of this definition can be seen as dimensions that together generate a possibility space to characterise cross-linguistic diversity in depictive means of expression. This approach allows for the systematic comparative treatment of ideophones and ideophone-like phenomena. Some phenomena in the larger typological space are discussed to demonstrate the utility of the approach: phonaesthemes in European languages, specialised semantic classes in West-Chadic, diachronic diversions in Aslian, and depicting constructions in signed languages.
Published online: 06 May 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.16.02din
References

References

Ahlner, F. and Zlatev, J.
2010 Cross-modal iconicity: A cognitive semiotic approach to sound symbolism. Sign Systems Studies 38: 298–348.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ajello, R., Mazzoni, L. and Nicolai, F.
2001 Linguistic gestures: Mouthing in Italian Sign Language. In The Hands Are the Head of the Mouth: The Mouth as Articulator in Sign Languages, P. Boyes Braem and R. L. Sutton-Spence (eds), 231–246. Hamburg: Signum Verlag.Google Scholar
Akita, K.
2008 Phonosemantic evidence for the mimetic stratum in the Japanese lexicon. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Sarah Berson et al. (eds), 1–12. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
2009 A grammar of sound-symbolic words in Japanese: Theoretical approaches to iconic and lexical properties of Japanese mimetics. Ph.D. dissertation, Kobe University. http://​www​.lib​.kobe​-u​.ac​.jp​/handle​_gakui​/D1004724
2011 Toward a phonosemantic definition of iconic words. In Semblance and Signification [Iconicity in Language and Literature 10], P. Michelucci, O. Fischer and C. Ljungberg (eds), 3–18. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2015 Sound symbolism. In Handbook of Pragmatics, J. -O. Östman and J. Verschueren (eds), 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Alpher, B.
1994 Yir-Yoront ideophones. In Sound Symbolism, L. Hinton, J. Nichols and J. J. Ohala (eds), 161–177. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ameka, F. K.
2001 Ideophones and the nature of the adjective word class in Ewe. In Ideophones, F. K. E. Voeltz and C. Kilian-Hatz (eds), 25–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Armoskaite, S. and Koskinen, P.
2017 Structuring sensory imagery: Ideophones across languages and cultures. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 62: 149-153. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, R.
2014 Ideophones and (non-)arbitrariness in the K’iche’ poetry of Humberto Ak’abal. Pragmatics and Society 5: 406–418. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bergen, B. K.
2004 The psychological reality of phonaesthemes. Language 80: 290–311.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bergman, B. and Dahl, Ö.
1994 Ideophones in sign language? The place of reduplication in the tense-aspect system of Swedish Sign Language. In Tense, Aspect and Action: Empirical and Theoretical Contributions to Language Typology, C. Bache, H. Basbøll and C. -E. Lindberg (eds), 397–422. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blench, R.
2013 Mwaghavul expressives. In Chadic Linguistics 8, H. Tourneux (ed.), 53–75. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. L.
1961 Generality, Gradience, and the All-or-None. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Bowler, M. and Gluckman, J.
2018 Intensifying ideophones in three Luhya languages. In Proceedings of TripleA 4, E. Bogal-Allbritten and E. Coppock (eds), 31–47. Göteborg: University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
Brown, D. and Chumakina, M.
2013 What there might be and what there is: An introduction to Canonical Typology. In Canonical Morphology and Syntax, D. Brown, M. Chumakina and G. G. Corbett (eds), 1–19. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bühler, K.
1934 Sprachtheorie: Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Jena: G. Fischer.Google Scholar
Burenhult, N. and Majid, A.
2011 Olfaction in Aslian ideology and language. The Senses and Society 6: 19–29.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Childs, G. T.
1994 African ideophones. In Sound Symbolism, L. Hinton, J. Nichols and J. J. Ohala (eds), 178–204. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H.
2016 Depicting as a method of communication. Psychological Review 123: 324–347. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H. and Gerrig, R. J.
1990 Quotations as demonstrations. Language 66: 764–805.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, G. G.
2007 Canonical typology, suppletion, and possible words. Language 83: 8–42.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W.
2001 Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeCamp, D.
1974 Neutralization, iteratives, and ideophones: The locus of language in Jamaica. In Pidgins and Creoles: Current Trends and Prospects, D. DeCamp and I. F. Hancock (eds), 46–60. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Diffloth, G.
1972 Notes on expressive meaning. In Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of Chicago Linguistic Society, P. M. Peranteau, J. N. Levi, and G. C. Phares (eds), 440–447. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1976 Expressives in Semai. Oceanic Linguistics Special Publications 13: 249–264.Google Scholar
2001 Les expressifs de Surin, et où cela conduit. Bulletin de l’Ecole Française d’Extrême-Orient 88: 261–269. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dingemanse, M.
2012 Advances in the cross-linguistic study of ideophones. Language and Linguistics Compass 6: 654–672. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014 Making new ideophones in Siwu: Creative depiction in conversation. Pragmatics and Society 5: 384–405. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017 Expressiveness and system integration: On the typology of ideophones, with special reference to Siwu. STUF – Language Typology and Universals 70: 363–384. Crossref sGoogle Scholar
2018 Redrawing the margins of language: Lessons from research on ideophones. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3: 4. 1–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Doke, C. M.
1935 Bantu Linguistic Terminology. London: Longmans, Green, and Co.Google Scholar
Dryer, M. S.
1997 Are grammatical relations universal? In Essays on Language Function and Language Type, J. Bybee, J. Haiman and S. A. Thompson (eds), 115–143. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, L. and Halvorsen, R. P.
2017 Depicting and describing meanings with iconic signs in Norwegian Sign Language. Gesture 17: 375–399. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, L. and Hodge, G.
2018 Language as description, indication, and depiction. Frontiers in Psychology 9: 716. 1–716.15. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fischer-Jørgensen, E.
1978 On the universal character of phonetic symbolism with special reference to vowels. Studia Linguistica 32: 80–90. Crossref sGoogle Scholar
Güldemann, T.
2008 Quotative Indexes in African Languages: A Synchronic and Diachronic Survey [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 34]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gxowa, N. C.
1994 Ideophones in Xhosa. M.A. thesis, University of Stellenbosch.Google Scholar
Hamano, S.
1998 The Sound-Symbolic System of Japanese. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M.
2007 Pre-established categories don’t exist: Consequences for language description and typology. Linguistic Typology 11: 119–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86: 663–687.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hogue, R. L.
2011 OOs and AAs: Mouth gestures as ideophones in American Sign Language. Ph.D. dissertation, Gallaudet University. http://​gradworks​.umi​.com​/34​/85​/3485223​.html
Hyman, L. M.
1975 Phonology: Theory and Analysis. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I.
2017 Basque ideophones from a typological perspective. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 62: 196–220.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Iwasaki, N., Sells, P. and Akita, K.
(eds) 2017 The Grammar of Japanese Mimetics: Perspectives from Structure, Acquisition, and Translation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Iwasaki, N., Vinson, D. P. and Vigliocco, G.
2007 What do English speakers know about gera-gera and yota-yota?: A cross-linguistic investigation of mimetic words for laughing and walking. Japanese-Language Education around the Globe 17: 53–78.Google Scholar
Jacques, G.
2013 Ideophones in Japhug Rgyalrong. Anthropological Linguistics 55: 256–287.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, O.
1921 Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. M.
1976 Toward a definition of the ideophone in Bantu. Working Papers in Linguistics 21: 240–253.Google Scholar
Kilian-Hatz, C.
1999 Ideophone: Eine typologische Untersuchung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung afrikanischer Sprachen. Habilitationsschrift, Universität zu Köln.Google Scholar
Kita, S.
1997 Two-dimensional semantic analysis of Japanese mimetics. Linguistics 35: 379–415.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Klamer, M.
2002 Semantically motivated lexical patterns: A study of Dutch and Kambera expressives. Language 78: 258–286.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kruspe, N.
2004 A Grammar of Semelai. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kunene, D. P.
1965 The ideophone in Southern Sotho. Journal of African Languages 4: 19–39.Google Scholar
Kwon, N.
2015 The natural motivation of sound symbolism. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Queensland.Google Scholar
2017 Total reduplication in Japanese ideophones: An exercise in Localized Canonical Typology. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 2: 40. 1–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kwon, N. and Round, E. R.
2014 Phonaesthemes in morphological theory. Morphology 25: 1–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Le Guen, O. 2012 Ideophones in Yucatec Maya. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Indigenous Languages of Latin America (CILLA V). Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin. http://​www​.ailla​.utexas​.org​/site​/events​.htmlGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M.
1980 On-line processing constraints on the properties of signed and spoken language. In Signed and Spoken Language: Biological Constraints on Linguistic Form, U. Bellugi and M. Studdert-Kennedy (eds), 141–160. Weinheim: Verlag Chemie.Google Scholar
Liberman, M.
1975 The intonational system of English. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Lu, J. C. and Goldin-Meadow, S.
2018 Creating images with the stroke of a hand: Depiction of size and shape in sign language. Frontiers in Psychology 9: 1276. 1–15. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maffi, L.
1990 Tzeltal Maya affect verbs: Psychological salience and expressive functions of language. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: Special Session on General Topics in American Indian Linguistics, D. J. Costa (ed.), 61–72. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Matisoff, J. A.
2003 Aslian: Mon-Khmer of the Malay Peninsula. Mon-Khmer Studies 33: 1–58.Google Scholar
Mattes, V.
2018 Iconicity in the lexicon: The semantic categories of lexical reduplication. Studies in Language 41: 813–842. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McCawley, J. D.
1968 The Phonological Component of a Grammar of Japanese. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Mihas, E.
2012 Ideophones in Alto Perene (Arawak) from Eastern Peru. Studies in Language 36: 300–344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moshi, L.
1993 Ideophones in KiVunjo-Chaga. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 3: 185–216.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Newman, P.
1968 Ideophones from a syntactic point of view. Journal of West African Languages 5: 107–117.Google Scholar
Nuckolls, J. B.
1996 Sounds like Life: Sound-Symbolic Grammar, Performance, and Cognition in Pastaza Quechua. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1999 The case for sound symbolism. Annual Review of Anthropology 28: 225–252.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004 To be or not to be ideophonically impoverished. In Texas Linguistic Forum 47: Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Symposium about Language and Society, W. F. Chiang, E. Chun, L. Mahalingappa and S. Mehus (eds), 131–142. Austin: University of Texas.Google Scholar
Nuckolls, J. B., Nielsen, E., Stanley, J. A. and Hopper, R.
2016 The systematic stretching and contracting of ideophonic phonology in Pastaza Quichua. International Journal of American Linguistics 82: 95–116. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Okrent, A.
2002 A modality-free notion of gesture and how it can help us with the morpheme vs. gesture question in sign language linguistics (or at least give us some criteria to work with). In Modality and Structure in Signed and Spoken Languages, R. P. Meier, K. Cormier, and D. Quinto-Pozos (eds), 175–198. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peirce, C. S.
1955 Philosophical Writings of Peirce. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Perlman, M., Little, H., Thompson, B. and Thompson, R. L.
2018 Iconicity in signed and spoken vocabulary: A comparison between American Sign Language, British Sign Language, English, and Spanish. Frontiers in Psychology 9: 1433. 1–16. Crossref sGoogle Scholar
Perniss, P., Thompson, R. L. and Vigliocco, G.
2010 Iconicity as a general property of language: Evidence from spoken and signed languages. Frontiers in Psychology 1: 227. 1–15. Crossref.Google Scholar
Perry, L. K., Perlman, M. and Lupyan, G.
2015 Iconicity in English and Spanish and its relation to lexical category and age of acquisition. PLoS ONE 10: e0137147. 1–17. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rai, N. K., Bickel, B., Banjade, G., Gaenszle, M., Lieven, E., Paudyal, N., Rai, I. and Stoll, S.
2005 Triplication and ideophones in Chintang. In Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics, Y. Yadava, G. Bhattarai, R. R. Lohani, B. Prasain and K. Parajuli (eds), 205–209. Kathmandu: Linguistic Society of Nepal.Google Scholar
Reiter, S.
2012 Ideophones in Awetí. Ph.D. dissertation, Kiel: University of Kiel.Google Scholar
Roosevelt, T.
1913 History as Literature, and Other Essays. New York: C. Scribner’s sons.Google Scholar
Samarin, W. J.
1969 The art of Gbeya insults. International Journal of American Linguistics 35: 323–329.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1970 Inventory and choice in expressive language. Word 26: 153–169.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sien, N. -C.
1997 An autosegmental analysis of ideophones in Korean. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Stokoe, W.
1960 Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. Studies in Linguistics, Occasional Papers 8. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.Google Scholar
Taub, S. F.
2001 Language from the Body: Iconicity and Metaphor in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tedlock, D.
1999 Ideophone. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 9: 118–120.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tufvesson, S.
2011 Analogy-making in the Semai sensory world. The Senses and Society 6: 86–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Uhlenbeck, E. M.
1952 The study of wordclasses in Javanese. Lingua 3: 322–354. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Waugh, L. R.
1994 Degrees of iconicity in the lexicon. Journal of Pragmatics 22: 55–70.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Webster, A. K.
2017 “So it’s got three meanings dil dil”: Seductive ideophony and the sounds of Navajo poetry. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 62: 173–195. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Werner, H. and Kaplan, B.
1963 Symbol Formation: An Organismic-Developmental Approach to Language and the Expression of Thought. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Wescott, R. W.
1977 Ideophones in Bini and English. Forum Linguisticum 2: 1–13.Google Scholar
Westermann, D. H.
1927 Laut, Ton und Sinn in westafrikanischen Sudansprachen. In Festschrift Meinhof, F. Boas (ed.), 315–328. Hamburg: L. Friederichsen.Google Scholar
Wnuk, E.
2016 Semantic specificity of perception verbs in Maniq. Ph.D. dissertation, Radboud University.Google Scholar
Wnuk, E. and Majid, A.
2014 Revisiting the limits of language: The odor lexicon of Maniq. Cognition 131: 125–138. Crossref sGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 9 other publications

Badenoch, Nathan
2021. Silence, Cessation and Stasis: The Ethnopoetics of “Absence” in Bit Expressives. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology Crossref logo
DINGEMANSE, MARK, MARCUS PERLMAN & PAMELA PERNISS
2020. Construals of iconicity: experimental approaches to form–meaning resemblances in language. Language and Cognition 12:1 ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
DINGEMANSE, MARK & BILL THOMPSON
2020. Playful iconicity: structural markedness underlies the relation between funniness and iconicity. Language and Cognition 12:1 ► pp. 203 ff. Crossref logo
Haspelmath, Martin
2021.  In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language, 132], ► pp. 35 ff. Crossref logo
Hsu, Hui-Chieh, Geert Brône & Kurt Feyaerts
2021.  In other gestures: Multimodal iteration in cello master classes. Linguistics Vanguard 7:s4 Crossref logo
Hsu, Hui-Chieh, Geert Brône & Kurt Feyaerts
2021. When Gesture “Takes Over”: Speech-Embedded Nonverbal Depictions in Multimodal Interaction. Frontiers in Psychology 11 Crossref logo
McLean, Bonnie
2021. Revising an implicational hierarchy for the meanings of ideophones, with special reference to Japonic. Linguistic Typology 25:3 ► pp. 507 ff. Crossref logo
Thompson, Arthur Lewis, Kimi Akita & Youngah Do
2020. Iconicity ratings across the Japanese lexicon: A comparative study with English. Linguistics Vanguard 6:1 Crossref logo
Thompson, Arthur Lewis, Thomas Van Hoey & Youngah Do
2021. Articulatory features of phonemes pattern to iconic meanings: evidence from cross-linguistic ideophones. Cognitive Linguistics 32:4 ► pp. 563 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 november 2021. 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.