Phonetic symbolism in English word-formation

doi:10.1515/9783110243062.146

Cited by 10 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous research into onomatopoeia mainly dealt with its delimitation in the language system, its scope, and its semiotic nature (e.g., Jakobson 1971;Nöth 1990;Waugh 1994;Nuckolls 1996;Carling and Johansson 2015;Catricalà and Guidi 2015;Körtvélyessy 2020Körtvélyessy , 2021a, its sound-symbolic and phonological characteristics (e.g., Marchand 1959Marchand , 1960Hinton et al 1995;Rhodes 1995;Tsur 2001;Bergen 2004;Ivanova 2006;Voronin 2006;Nuckolls 2010;Assaneo et al 2011;Dingemanse 2011aDingemanse , 2011bDingemanse , 2011cFeist 2013;Fidalgo et al 2018;Körtvélyessy 2020;, the metaphoric/metonymic nature of secondary onomatopoeias (Benczes 2018, Sasamoto 2019, as well as diachronic aspects of onomatopoeias and their lexicalization 4 (Mithun 1982;McMahon 1994;Anderson 1998;Flaksman 2015Flaksman , 2017Flaksman , 2018Flaksman , 2019. Very little attention, however, has been paid to the word-formation capacity of primary onomatopoeia.…”

Section: Onomatopoeiasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Derivational networks of onomatopoeias in English and Slovak

Körtvélyessy

Andrej²

2023

Can. J. Linguist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents research into derivational properties of onomatopoeias in English and in Slovak. Onomatopoeias are defined narrowly in our approach, being restricted to the direct imitation of sounds of extra-linguistic reality. Our sample of 40 onomatopoeic words consists of two sound types: the sounds of animals and the sounds resulting from various falls, strokes, and bursts. A derivational network was produced for each such word. The evaluation parameters comprise derivational capacity, maximum derivational network, saturation value, number of derivation orders, most productive semantic categories by order of derivation, typical combinations of semantic categories, and derivational processes. An evaluation of the networks enabled us to answer the question of whether onomatopoeias are productive word-formation bases, to compare the two Sound Types, and to compare onomatopoeia-based networks to those based on non-iconic vocabulary. These results contribute to a better understanding of the word-formation systems in the compared languages and of the status of onomatopoeias with regard to non-iconic vocabulary.

show abstract