1887
Volume 17, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1871-1340
  • E-ISSN: 1871-1375
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Ideophones are marked words that depict sensory imagery and are hypothesized to be structurally marked, i.e., exhibiting unique structural properties. In this paper, “marked” is broadly used to mean phonologically marked (Dingemanse, 2021: Akita and Dingemanse, 2019). Using Cantonese ideophones as our case study, this paper measures sequential predictability within ideophones and non-ideophones, as a way to test their relative degree of structural markedness. We created a database of non-ideophones and ideophones from the Hong Kong Cantonese Corpus (HKCC) (Luke and Wong, 2015) and Mok (2001) and calculated the sequential predictability of each phoneme in various phonological contexts. The results indicate that Cantonese ideophones exhibit lower degrees of sequential predictability than non-ideophones, lending empirical support to the structural markedness of ideophones. We argue that non-ideophones exhibit a higher degree of sequential predictability because they follow the phonotactic regularities of Cantonese, whereas ideophones, to some degree, flout these regulations in favor of sequences of sounds that might better depict a given referent or percept.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ml.21016.tho
2022-11-29
2024-02-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Akita, K.
    (2011) Toward a phonosemantic definition of iconic words. Semblance and Signification, 1–18.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Akita, K., Imai, M., Saji, N., Kantartzis, K., & Kita, S.
    (2013) Mimetic vowel harmony. InB. Frellesvig & P. Sells (Eds.), Japanese/Korean linguistics, vol. 20 (pp.115–129). CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Akita, K. & Dingemanse, M.
    (2019) Ideophones (Mimetics, Expressives). InOxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics (ed.Mark Aronoff). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.477
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.477 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baayen, R. H., Chuang, Y. Y., Shafaei-Bajestan, E., & Blevins, J. P.
    (2019) The discriminative lexicon: A unified computational model for the lexicon and lexical processing in comprehension and production grounded not in (de) composition but in linear discriminative learning. Complexity, 2019. 10.1155/2019/4895891
    https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4895891 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bailey, T. M., & Hahn, U.
    (2001) Determinants of wordlikeness: Phonotactics or lexical neighborhoods?Journal of Memory and Language, 44(4), 568–591. 10.1006/jmla.2000.2756
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2756 [Google Scholar]
  6. Beck, D.
    (2008) Ideophones, adverbs, and predicate qualification in Upper Necaxa Totonac. International Journal of American Linguistics, 74(1), 1–46. 10.1086/529462
    https://doi.org/10.1086/529462 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chae, W.
    (2003) Hankwukeuy uysengewa uythaye [Korean onomatopoeia and mimetic words]. Seoul: Seoul National University.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Chan, H.-K.
    (2001) Guangzhouhua ABB-shi xingrongci yanjiu廣州話 ABB 式形容詞研究 [A study of ABB adjectives in Cantonese]. Zhongguo Yuwen Tongxun中國語文通訊 [Newsletter of Chinese Language], 581, 16–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Clark, H. H., & Gerrig, R. J.
    (1990) Quotations as Demonstrations. Language, 66(4), 764–805. 10.2307/414729
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414729 [Google Scholar]
  10. Dellert, J., & Buch, A.
    (2018) A new approach to concept basicness and stability as a window to the robustness of concept list rankings. Language Dynamics and Change, 8(2), 157–181. 10.1163/22105832‑00802001
    https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-00802001 [Google Scholar]
  11. Denistia, K., Shafaei-Bajestan, E., & Baayen, R. H.
    (2021) Exploring semantic differences between the Indonesian prefixes PE-and PEN-using a vector space model. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Diffloth, G.
    (1972) Notes on expressive meaning. InP. M. Peranteau, J. N. Nevi, & G. C. Phares (Eds.), Chicago linguistic society. Papers from the eighth regional meeting (pp.440–447). Chicago linguistic society.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. (1979) Expressive phonology and prosaic phonology in Mon-Khmer. InStudies in Tai and Mon-Khmer Phonetics and Phonology In Honour of Eugénie J.A. Henderson (pp.49–59). Chulalongkorn University Press. sealang.net/sala/archives/pdf8/diffloth1979expressive.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Dingemanse, M.
    (2012) Advances in the cross-linguistic study of ideophones. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(10), 654–672. 10.1002/lnc3.361
    https://doi.org/10.1002/lnc3.361 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2014) Making new ideophones in Siwu: Creative depiction in conversation. Pragmatics and Society, 5(3), 384–405. 10.1075/ps.5.3.04din
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.5.3.04din [Google Scholar]
  16. (2018) Redrawing the margins of language: Lessons from research on ideophones. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 3(1), Article 1. 10.5334/gjgl.444
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.444 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2019) ‘Ideophones’ as a comparative concept. InK. Akita & P. Parudeshi (Eds.), Ideophones, mimetics and expressives (pp.13–33). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/ill.16.02din
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.16.02din [Google Scholar]
  18. (2021) Ideophones (Oxford Handbook of Word Classes). PsyArXiv. 10.31234/osf.io/u96zt
    https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/u96zt [Google Scholar]
  19. Dingemanse, M., Blasi, D. E., Lupyan, G., Christiansen, M. H., & Monaghan, P.
    (2015) Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(10), 603–615. 10.1016/j.tics.2015.07.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.07.013 [Google Scholar]
  20. Dingemanse, M., Schuerman, W., Reinisch, E., Tufvesson, S., & Mitterer, H.
    (2016) What sound symbolism can and cannot do: Testing the iconicity of ideophones from five languages. Language, 92(2), e117–e133. 10.1353/lan.2016.0034
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0034 [Google Scholar]
  21. Dingemanse, M., & Akita, K.
    (2017) An inverse relation between expressiveness and grammatical integration: on the morphosyntactic typology of ideophones, with special reference to Japanese. Journal of Linguistics, 53(3), 501–532. 10.1017/S002222671600030X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S002222671600030X [Google Scholar]
  22. Dingemanse, M., Perlman, M., & Perniss, P.
    (2020) Construals of iconicity: Experimental approaches to form–meaning resemblances in language. Language and Cognition, 12(1), 1–14. 10.1017/langcog.2019.48
    https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2019.48 [Google Scholar]
  23. Do, Y., & Lai, R. K. Y.
    (2021) Accounting for Lexical Tones When Modeling Phonological Distance. Language. 10.1353/lan.2021.0012
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2021.0012 [Google Scholar]
  24. Emmorey, K.
    (2014) Iconicity as structure mapping. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369(1651), 20130301. 10.1098/rstb.2013.0301
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0301 [Google Scholar]
  25. Ferrara, L., & Hodge, G.
    (2018) Language as Description, Indication, and Depiction. Frontiers in Psychology, 91. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00716
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00716 [Google Scholar]
  26. Goldin-Meadow, S.
    (2007) Gesture with speech and without it. InS. D. Duncan, J. Cassell, & E. T. Levy (Eds.), Gesture and the dynamic dimension of language: Essays in honor of David McNeill (pp.31–49). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/gs.1.05gol
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.1.05gol [Google Scholar]
  27. Güldemann, T.
    (2008) Quotative Indexes in African Languages. A Synchronic and Diachronic Survey. 10.1515/9783110211450
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110211450 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hamano, S.
    (1998) The sound-symbolic system of Japanese. CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hatton, S. A.
    (2016) The onomatopoeic ideophone-gesture relationship in Pastaza Quichua [Master’s thesis, Brigham Young University]. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/6123
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Hinton, L., Nichols, J., & Ohala, J. J.
    (1994) Sound symbolism. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Hollander, M., & Wolfe, D. A.
    (1973) Nonparametric Statistical Methods. John Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Imai, M., Kita, S., Nagumo, M., & Okada, H.
    (2008) Sound symbolism facilitates early verb learning. Cognition, 109(1), 54–65. 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.015 [Google Scholar]
  33. Iwasaki, N., David, P. V., & Gabriella, V.
    (2007) What do English Speakers Know about gera-gera and yota-yota?: A Cross-linguistic Investigation of Mimetic Words of Laughing and Walking. Japanese language education around the globe, 171, 53–78.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Iwasaki, N., Vinson, D. P., & Vigliocco, G.
    (2007) How does it hurt, kiri-kiri or siku-siku? Japanese mimetic words of pain perceived by Japanese speakers and English speakers. InM. Minami (Ed.), Applying theory and research to learning Japanese as a foreign language (pp.2–19). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. https://eprints.soas.ac.uk/6438/
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Johansson, N. E., Anikin, A., Carling, G., & Holmer, A.
    (2020) The typology of sound symbolism: Defining macro-concepts via their semantic and phonetic features. Linguistic Typology, 24(2), 253–310. 10.1515/lingty‑2020‑2034
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2020-2034 [Google Scholar]
  36. Johnson, M. R.
    (1976) Toward a definition of the ideophone in Bantu. InA. M. Zwicky (Ed.), Papers in nonphonology (pp.240–253). The Ohio State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Kantartzis, K., Imai, M., & Kita, S.
    (2011) Japanese Sound-Symbolism Facilitates Word Learning in English-Speaking Children. Cognitive Science, 35(3), 575–586. 10.1111/j.1551‑6709.2010.01169.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01169.x [Google Scholar]
  38. Kendon, A.
    (2004) Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511807572
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807572 [Google Scholar]
  39. Kita, S.
    (1997) Two-dimensional semantic analysis of Japanese mimetics. Linguistics, 35(2), 379–415. 10.1515/ling.1997.35.2.379
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1997.35.2.379 [Google Scholar]
  40. Kita, S., de Condappa, O., & Mohr, C.
    (2007) Metaphor explanation attenuates the right-hand preference for depictive co-speech gestures that imitate actions. Brain and Language, 101(3), 185–197. 10.1016/j.bandl.2006.11.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2006.11.006 [Google Scholar]
  41. Kunene, D. P.
    (1965) The ideophone in Southern Sotho. Journal of African Languages, 41, 19–39.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Kwon, N.
    (2018) Iconicity correlated with vowel harmony in Korean ideophones. Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology, 9(1), 1. 10.5334/labphon.53
    https://doi.org/10.5334/labphon.53 [Google Scholar]
  43. Lai, C.
    (2015) A quantitative study of information structure and right dislocation in Cantonese spoken discourse [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Hong Kong]. hub.hku.hk/handle/10722/221089. 10.5353/th_b5576792
    https://doi.org/10.5353/th_b5576792
  44. Lockwood, G., Dingemanse, M., & Hagoort, P.
    (2016) Sound-symbolism boosts novel word learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(8), 1274–1281. 10.1037/xlm0000235
    https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000235 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lockwood, G., Hagoort, P., & Dingemanse, M.
    (2016) How Iconicity Helps People Learn New Words: Neural Correlates and Individual Differences in Sound-Symbolic Bootstrapping. Collabra, 2(7). 10.1525/collabra.42
    https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.42 [Google Scholar]
  46. Luke, K. K., & Wong, M. L. Y.
    (2015) The Hong Kong Cantonese corpus: Design and uses. Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series, 251, 312–333.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Matthews, S., & Yip, V.
    (2011) Cantonese: A comprehensive grammar (2nd ed). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. McNeill, D.
    (1992) Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Mihas, E.
    (2012) Ideophones in Alto Perené (Arawak) from Eastern Peru. Studies in Language. International Journal Sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language”, 36(2), 300–344. 10.1075/sl.36.2.04mih
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.36.2.04mih [Google Scholar]
  50. Mithun, M.
    (1982) The Synchronic and Diachronic Behavior of Plops, Squeaks, Croaks, Sighs, and Moans. International Journal of American Linguistics – INT J AMER LINGUIST, 481. 10.1086/465712
    https://doi.org/10.1086/465712 [Google Scholar]
  51. Mittelberg, I.
    (2019) Visuo-Kinetic signs are inherently metonymic: How embodied metonymy motivates forms, functions, and schematic patterns in gesture. Frontiers in Psychology, 101. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00254
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00254 [Google Scholar]
  52. Mok, W. E.
    (2001) Chinese sound symbolism: A phonological perspective [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Hawaii.
  53. Monaghan, P., Chater, N., & Christiansen, M. H.
    (2005) The differential role of phonological and distributional cues in grammatical categorisation. Cognition, 96(2), 143–182. 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.09.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  54. Monaghan, P., Christiansen, M. H., & Chater, N.
    (2007) The phonological-distributional coherence hypothesis: Cross-linguistic evidence in language acquisition. Cognitive Psychology, 55(4), 259–305. 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  55. Nasu, A.
    (2004) Sinzoo-onomatope-no on’in-koozoo-to bunsetu-no muhyoosei [Phonological structure of mimetic neologisms and segmental unmarkedness]. Japanese Linguistics, 161, 69–91. 10.15084/00002131
    https://doi.org/10.15084/00002131 [Google Scholar]
  56. Newman, P.
    (1968) Ideophones from a syntactic point of view.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. (2001) Are ideophones really as weird and extra-systematic as linguists make them out to be?Ideophones, 251–258. 10.1075/tsl.44.20new
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.44.20new [Google Scholar]
  58. Nuckolls, J. B.
    (2000) Spoken in the spirit of gesture: Translating sound symbolism in a Pastaza Quechua narrative. InK. Sammons & J. Sherzer (Eds.), Translating native Latin American verbal art: Ethnopoetics and ethnography of speaking (pp.233–251). Smithsonian Institution Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Nuckolls, J. B., Nielsen, E., Stanley, J. A., & Hopper, R.
    (2016) The systematic stretching and contracting of ideophonic phonology in Pastaza Quichua. International Journal of American Linguistics, 82(1), 95–116. 10.1086/684425
    https://doi.org/10.1086/684425 [Google Scholar]
  60. Pulleyblank, E. G.
    (1996) The Cantonese vowel system in historical perspective. InJ. Wang & N. Smith (Eds.), Studies in Chinese Phonology (Vol.201, pp.185–218). De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110822014.185
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110822014.185 [Google Scholar]
  61. Saito, M., Tomaschek, F., & Baayen, R. H.
    (2021) An ultrasound study of frequency and co-articulation. 10.31234/osf.io/6yndk
    https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/6yndk [Google Scholar]
  62. Samarin, W. J.
    (1967) Determining the meanings of ideophones. Journal of West African Languages, 4(2), 35–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. (1970) Field procedures in ideophone research. Journal of African Languages, 9(1), 27–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Sohn, H.-M.
    (1999) The Korean language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Taub
    Taub 2001Language from the Body: Iconicity and Metaphor in American Sign Language. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511509629
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511509629 [Google Scholar]
  66. Taitz, A., Assaneo, M., Elisei, N., Tripodi, M., Cohen, L., Sitt, J., & Trevisan, M.
    (2018) The audiovisual structure of onomatopoeias: An intrusion of real-world physics in lexical creation. PLOS ONE, 131, e0193466. 10.1371/journal.pone.0193466
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193466 [Google Scholar]
  67. Thompson, A. L.
    (2018) Are tones in the expressive lexicon iconic? Evidence from three Chinese languages. PLOS ONE, 13(12), e0204270. 10.1371/journal.pone.0204270
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0204270 [Google Scholar]
  68. Thompson, A. L., & Do, Y.
    (2019) Defining iconicity: An articulation-based methodology for explaining the phonological structure of ideophones. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 4(1), 72. 10.5334/gjgl.872
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.872 [Google Scholar]
  69. Thompson, A. L., Van Hoey, T., & Do, Y.
    (2021) Articulatory features of phonemes pattern to iconic meanings: evidence from cross-linguistic ideophones. Cognitive Linguistics, 32(4), 563. 10.1515/cog‑2020‑0055
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2020-0055 [Google Scholar]
  70. Tsou, B. K.-Y.
    (2017) Yueyu sizige guanyongyu: Chuancheng yu chuangxin [Quadrasyllabic expressions in Cantonese: Inheritance and innovation]. InB. K.-Y. Tsou & C. L. Tong (Eds.), Yueyu Yanjiu: Zhongguo Nanfang Yuyan Siyinjie Guanyongyu Yanjiu [Yue Dialect Research’s Supplementary Issue: Studies on Quadrasyllabic Expressions in Languages around South China] (pp.109–124). Macau Yue Dialects Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Tufvesson, S.
    (2011) Analogy-making in the Semai sensory world. The Senses and Society, 6(1), 86–95. 10.2752/174589311X12893982233876
    https://doi.org/10.2752/174589311X12893982233876 [Google Scholar]
  72. Van Hoey, T.
    (2020) Prototypicality and salience of Chinese ideophones: A cognitive and corpus linguistics approach [Doctoral dissertation, National Taiwan University]. https://www.thomasvanhoey.com/files/DISSERTATION.pdf
  73. Van Hoey, T., & Thompson, A. L.
    (2020) The Chinese Ideophone Database (CHIDEOD). Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale, 49(2), 136–167. 10.1163/19606028‑bja10006
    https://doi.org/10.1163/19606028-bja10006 [Google Scholar]
  74. Voeltz, F. E., & Kilian-Hatz, C.
    (2001) Ideophones (Vol.441). John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/tsl.44
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.44 [Google Scholar]
  75. Westermann, D. H.
    (1927) Laut und Sinn in einigen westafrikanischen Sprachen. InD. H. Westermann & E. Zwirner (Eds.), Archiv für vergleichende Phonetik 1 (pp.154–172, 193–211). Metten. ideophone.org/files/Westermann-1937-Laut-und-Sinn-in-einigen-westafrikanischen-Sudan-S.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Winter, B.
    (2016) The Sensory Structure of the English Lexicon [Ph.D., University of California, Merced]. https://www.proquest.com/docview/1799673969/abstract/3AC716E8573549A0PQ/1
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Williams, R. F.
    (2008) Gesture as a conceptual mapping tool. InA. J. Cienki & C. Müller (Eds.), Metaphor and gesture (pp.55–92). John Benjamins Pub. Co.faculty.lawrence.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/18/2015/11/Gesture-Mapping.pdf. 10.1075/gs.3.06wil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.3.06wil
  78. Zhang, S.
    (2016) Chaoyang fangyan yanjiu [Research on Chaoyang dialect]. Social Science Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ml.21016.tho
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.21016.tho
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Cantonese; ideophones; markedness; phonology
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error