音声と意味
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
I have attempted here to explain how and to what extent linguistic signs are motivated by their phonetic shapes, in diametrical but not unattempted opposition to the Saussurean dictum that they are arbitrary. Both semantic and phonological features of the so-called symbolic words are sketched out with recourse to Peirce's tripartite classification of signs in general, and some patently iconic aspects of the English vocabulary are brought to light. Such lexical items are conceived as falling into three main groups, namely, inarticulate correlatives, sheer onomatopoeia, and expressive or suggestive words. Mimetic and suggestive qualities in these words are supposed to arise mainly from the contiguity of articulation points, accumulation of similar phonetic patterns, and lastly, from a certain psychological conformity between sense and sound. A large number of symbolic words (as opposed to arbitrary ones) are characterized by their forms as well, and several phonological features are discussed as having utmost importance for the problems we are concerned here. Certain onomatopoetic and expressive words, for instance, manifest a strong tendency towards stereotyped patterns, which include vowel gradation, dissimilation, and what I have tentatively called consonant alternation. Each of these phenomena is amply discussed and their significance explored in relation with the nature of linguistic signs. How can a new coinage turn out to be meaningful, what underlies the expressiveness of words, why phonological rules are held obligatory in these words, and wherefor can one and the same lexical item be encoded in language in either way as an icon or as a symbol ? -these are the questions I believe I have reasonably explained. It also became clear that there are' problems in this sort of morphology that cannot be adequately dealt with so long as we remain in the sphere of morphology alone. Distribution of phonological units, phonaesthemes, and above all the intent of an utterance as a whole have to be mustered up in the assessessment of the inherent qualities of words. In this sense, lexical quality must be considered as subservient to the functions of linguistic messages.
- 東海大学の論文