4.2. Imagic Icons教案.pptVIP

4.2. Imagic Icons Explanations for Magnitude Sound Symbolism High, front vowels (such as [i]) are associated with smallness (and related notions); low, back vowels (such as [a, u]) are associated with largeness (and related notions). Explanations: Articulatory and acoustic Articulatory configurations of vowels – Sapir (1929), Paget (1930), Bolinger (1968): “The size of the mouth cavity ... is matched with the meaning.” “The small oral volume of [i] and larger oral volume of [u] or [a] are responsible for a kinesthetic impression of size associated with different vowels.” 4.2. Imagic Icons Peterfalvi (1965): “The further you penetrate the body, the darker it is there.’’ “Darkness”/“brightness” of vowels are associated with large and small size, respectively. Brown (1958): Large objects usually produce dark (low frequency) sounds when pushed or moved in certain ways, whereas small objects produce bright (high frequency) sounds. 4.2. Imagic Icons Limitation of the explanations based on articulatory configurations – Pitches and consonants? High tones (with higher F0), voiceless obstruents (consonants formed by obstructing outward airflow, causing increased air pressure in the vocal tract; subdivided into plosives, fricatives, and affricates), dental, alveolar, palatal and front velars (with higher frequencies of bursts, frication noise and/or formant transitions) are associated with SMALLNESS. Low tones (with lower F0), voiced consonants, labials and back velars (with lower frequency) are associated with LARGENESS. 4.2. Imagic Icons Acoustic: The Frequency Code Theory – John Ohala (1982, 1994) – A general “frequency code” explains several types of size (magnitude) sound symbolism: high frequency sounds connote small size, due to the fact that small animals make high frequency sounds and large animals make low frequency sounds. The potential to unify claims for magnitude symbolism in vowels, consonants, tones, and intonation. vocalizations by dominant and aggress