Chapter 4
Cross-linguistic variation in phonaesthemic canonicity, with special reference to Korean and English
This study compares the canonicity values of Korean paradigmatic phonaesthemes (e.g., pɛŋpɛŋ: pʰɛŋpʰɛŋ ‘a neutral: stronger and more violent motion of circling’; piŋkɨl: pɛŋkɨl ‘twirling of a bigger: smaller object’) and of English non-paradigmatic phonaesthemes (e.g., gl- ‘vision, light’ in glisten, glitter, gleam, glow). Measured against Kwon and Round’s (2015) seven canonical criteria for phonaesthemes, it reveals that they are differentiated only in terms of the strict restriction of one meaning per form. The contribution of the current canonical analysis of variations in phonaesthemic phenomena is twofold: (i) it empirically clarifies the relationship between English and Korean phonaesthemes; and (ii) it demonstrates the utility of the proposed canonical criteria for phonaesthemes, for cross-linguistic comparisons of phonaesthemic phenomena.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Canonical Typology
- 2.1Essential components of the framework: base, core, and criteria
- 2.2Previous study on phonaesthemic canonicity: Kwon and Round (2015)
- 3.Overview of Korean phonaesthemes in ideophones
- 4.Data
- 5.Canonical analysis of Korean paradigmatic phonaesthemes
- 5.1Frequency among lexical stems
- 5.2Frequency among parts of speech
- 5.3Image iconicity
- 5.4One form, one meaning
- 5.5Non-recurrent residues
- 5.6Transparency of form
- 6.Discussion
- 7.Conclusion
-
Acknowledgements
-
Notes
-
References
References (56)
References
Abelin, Å. 1999. Studies in sound symbolism. Ph.D. dissertation, Göteborg University.
Abramova, E., Fernández, R. and Sangati, F. 2013. Automatic labeling of phonesthemic senses. Proceedings of the 35th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz, and I. Wachsmuth (eds),1696–1701.
Baerman, M. and Corbett, G. G. 2012. Stem alternations and multiple exponence. Word Structure 5: 52–68.
Bergen, B. K. 2004. The psychological reality of phonaesthemes. Language 80: 290–311.
Blasi, D. E., Wichmann, S., Hammarström, H., Stadler, P. F. and Christiansen, M. H. 2016. Sound-meaning association biases evidenced across thousands of languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113: 10818–10823.
Bolinger, D. L. 1950. Rime, assonance, and morpheme analysis. Word 6: 117–136.
Bond, O. 2013. A base for canonical negation. In Canonical Morphology and Syntax, D. Brown, M. Chumakina and G. G. Corbett (eds), 20–47. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brown, D., Chumakina, M., Corbett, G. G., Popova, G. and Spencer, A. 2012. Defining ‘periphrasis’: Key notions. Morphology 22: 233–275.
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.
Childs, G. T. 1994. African ideophones. In Sound Symbolism, L. Hinton, J. Nichols and J. Ohala (eds), 178–204. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Corbett, G. G. 2003. Agreement: Canonical instances and the extent of the phenomenon. In Topics in Morphology: Selected Papers from the Third Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (Barcelona, September 20–22, 2001), A. Ralli and S. Scalise (eds), 109–128. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Corbett, G. G. 2005. The canonical approach in typology. In Linguistic Diversity and Language Theories (Studies in Language Companion Series 72), Z. Frajzyngier, A. Hodges and D. S. Rood (eds), 25–49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Corbett, G. G. 2007. Canonical Typology, suppletion, and possible words. Language 83: 8–42.
Corbett, G. G. 2010. Canonical derivational morphology. Word Structure 3: 141–155.
Corbett, G. G. 2015. Morphosyntactic complexity: A typology of lexical splits. Language 91: 145–193.
Diffloth, G. 1994.
i: big, a: small. In Sound Symbolism, L. Hinton, J. Nichols, and J. Ohala (eds), 107–113. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dingemanse, M. 2012. Advances in the cross-linguistic study of ideophones. Language and Linguistics Compass 6: 654–672.
Dingemanse, M., Blasi, D. E., Lupyan, G., Christiansen, M. H., and Monaghan, P. 2015. Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 19: 603–615.
Dingemanse, M., Schuerman, W., Reinisch, E., Tufvesson, S. and Mitterer, H. 2016. What sound symbolism can and cannot do: Testing the iconicity of ideophones from five languages”. Language 92: 67–83.
Firth, J. 1930. Speech. London: Ernest Benn.
Haiman, J. 1980. The iconicity of grammar: Isomorphism and motivation. Language 56: 515–540.
Hamano, S. 1998. The Sound-Symbolic System of Japanese. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Hinton, L., Nichols J. and Ohala J. J. 1994. Sound symbolism. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hutchins, S. S. 1998. The psychological reality, variability, and compositionality of English phonaesthemes. Ph.D. dissertation, Emory University.
Hyman, L. M. 2012. In defense of prosodic typology: A response to Beckman and Venditti. Linguistic Typology 16: 341–385.
Jones, D. 1956. An Outline of English Phonetics. Cambridge: Heffer.
Kim, Y. S. 1984. Aspects of Korean morphology. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
Kwon, N. 2015. The natural motivation of sound symbolism. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Queensland.
Kwon, N. and Round, E. R. 2015. Phonaesthemes in morphological theory. Morphology 25: 1–27.
Kwon, N. 2016. Empirically observed iconicity levels of English phonaesthemes. Public Journal of Semiotics 7: 73–93.
Kwon, N. 2017. Total reduplication in Japanese ideophones: An exercise in Localized Canonical Typology. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 2: 40. 1–31.
Kwon, N. 2018. Iconicity correlated with vowel harmony in Korean ideophones. Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology 9: 1. 1–18.
Kwon, N. To appear. A theoretical extension of Ohala’s frequency code hypothesis on size-sound symbolism. In Sound Symbolism in the History of Thought, L. Nobile (ed.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Larsen, D. and Heinz, J. 2012. Neutral vowels in sound-symbolic vowel harmony in Korean. Phonology 29: 433–464.
Lee, J. S. 1992. Phonology and sound symbolism of Korean ideophones. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University.
Lockwood, G. and Dingemanse, M. 2015. Iconicity in the lab: A review of behavioural, developmental, and neuroimaging research into sound-symbolism. Frontiers in Psychology 6: 1246.
Marchand, H. 1969. The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word-Formation: A Synchronic-Diachronic Approach. München: Beck.
Martin, S. E. 1962. Phonetic symbolism in Korean. American Studies in Altaic Linguistics 13: 177–189.
McCarthy, J. J. 1983. Phonological features and morphological structure. In Papers from the Para-Session on the Interplay of Phonology, Morphology, and Syntax. J. F. Richardson, M. Marks and A. Chukerman (eds), 135–161. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
McCarthy, J. J. 1989. Linear order in phonological representation. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 71–99.
Monaghan, P., Shillcock, R. C., Christiansen, M. H., and Kirby, S. 2014. How arbitrary is language? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 369: 20130299.
Moravcsik, E. 1978. Reduplicative constructions. In Universals of Human Language, vol. 3: Word Structure, J. H. Greenberg (ed.), 297–334. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Otis, K. and Sagi, E. 2008 Phonoaesthemes: a corporabased analysis. Proceedings of the 30th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, B. C. Love, K McRae, and V. M. Sloutsky (eds), 65–70.
Parault, S. J. 2006. Sound symbolic word learning in written context. Contemporary Educational Psychology 31: 228–252. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.06.002.
Parault, S. J. and Schwanenflugel, P. J. 2006. Sound-symbolism: A piece in the puzzle of word learning. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 35(4): 329–351.
Peirce, C. S. 1932. Collected Writings, 2: Elements of Logic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Perniss, P., Thompson, R. and Vigliocco, G. 2010. Iconicity as a general property of language: evidence from spoken and signed languages. Frontiers in Psychology 1: 227.
Rhodes, R. A. and Lawler, J. M. 1981. Athematic metaphors. Proceedings of the 17th regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS 17), R. Hendrick, C. Masek, and M. F. Miller (eds). 318–342.
Silverstein, M. 1994. Relative motivation in denotational and indexical sound symbolism of Wasco-Wishram Chinookan. In Sound Symbolism, L. Hinton, J. Nichols, and J. J. Ohala (eds), 40–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sohn, H. -M. 1999. The Korean Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tufvesson, S. 2011. Analogy-making in the Semai sensory world. The Senses and Society 6: 86–95.
Ultan, R. 1978. Size-sound symbolism. In Universals of Human Language, vol. 2: Phonology, J. H. Greenberg, C. A. Ferguson, and E. A. Moravcsik (eds), 525–568. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Uspensky, B. A. 1972. Subsystems in language, their interrelations and their correlated universals. Linguistics: An International Review 88: 53–71.
Woodworth, N. L. 1991. Sound symbolism in proximal and distal forms. Linguistics 29: 273–300.
Zingler, T. 2017. Evidence against the morpheme: The history of English phonaesthemes. Language Sciences 62: 76–90.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Willemsen, Jeroen & Ehm Hjorth Miltersen
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 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.