Skip to main content
×
×
Home

An inverse relation between expressiveness and grammatical integration: On the morphosyntactic typology of ideophones, with special reference to Japanese 1

  • MARK DINGEMANSE (a1) and KIMI AKITA (a2)
Abstract

Words and phrases may differ in the extent to which they are susceptible to prosodic foregrounding and expressive morphology: their expressiveness. They may also differ in the degree to which they are integrated in the morphosyntactic structure of the utterance: their grammatical integration. We describe an inverse relation that holds across widely varied languages, such that more expressiveness goes together with less grammatical integration, and vice versa. We review typological evidence for this inverse relation in ten spoken languages, then quantify and explain it using Japanese corpus data. We do this by tracking ideophones – vivid sensory words also known as mimetics or expressives – across different morphosyntactic contexts and measuring their expressiveness in terms of intonation, phonation and expressive morphology. We find that as expressiveness increases, grammatical integration decreases. Using gesture as a measure independent of the speech signal, we find that the most expressive ideophones are most likely to come together with iconic gestures. We argue that the ultimate cause is the encounter of two distinct and partly incommensurable modes of representation: the gradient, iconic, depictive system represented by ideophones and iconic gestures, and the discrete, arbitrary, descriptive system represented by ordinary words. The study shows how people combine modes of representation in speech and demonstrates the value of integrating description and depiction into the scientific vision of language.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      An inverse relation between expressiveness and grammatical integration: On the morphosyntactic typology of ideophones, with special reference to Japanese 1
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      An inverse relation between expressiveness and grammatical integration: On the morphosyntactic typology of ideophones, with special reference to Japanese 1
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      An inverse relation between expressiveness and grammatical integration: On the morphosyntactic typology of ideophones, with special reference to Japanese 1
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
Author’s address: Language & Cognition Department, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, P.O. Box 310, 6500 AH Nijmegen, The Netherlands mark.dingemanse@mpi.nl
Author’s address: School of Languages and Cultures, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya-shi, Aichi 464-8601, Japan akita@lang.nagoya-u.ac.jp
Footnotes
Hide All
[1]

We thank NHK for allowing us to use the data from the Earthquake Archives, and Kyosuke Yamamoto for helping with the reliability check. Thanks to Nick Enfield, Gwilym Lockwood, Tayo Takada, Noburo Saji, Francisco Torreira, and three anonymous Journal of Linguistics referees for providing helpful comments. This research was supported by the Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science and an NWO Veni grant (MD) and by Grants-in-Aid for Young Scientists (24720179, 15K16741) and Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) (25370425) (KA).

Interlinear glosses follow the Leipzig Glossing Rules. An anonymised version of the data with all R code underlying the analyses is available through the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/x2y65/.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Akita Kimi. 2009. A grammar of sound-symbolic words in Japanese: Theoretical approaches to iconic and lexical properties of Japanese mimetics. Ph.D. dissertation, Kobe University. http://www.lib.kobe-u.ac.jp/handle_gakui/D1004724.
Akita Kimi & Usuki Takeshi. 2016. A constructional account of the ‘optional’ quotative marking on Japanese mimetics. Journal of Linguistics 52.2, 245275.
Alpher Barry. 2001. Ideophones in interaction with intonation and the expression of new information in some indigenous languages of Australia. In Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz(eds.), 914.
Ameka Felix K. 2001. Ideophones and the nature of the adjective word class in Ewe. In Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz (eds.), 2548.
Baba Junko. 2003. Pragmatic function of Japanese mimetics in the spoken discourse of varying emotive intensity levels. Journal of Pragmatics 35, 18611889.
Bates Douglas, Mächler Martin, Bolker Ben & Walker Steve. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67.1, 148.
Bateson Gregory. 1955. A theory of play and fantasy. Psychiatric Research Reports 2.39, 3951.
Blench Roger. 2013. Mwaghavul expressives. In Tourneux Henry (ed.), Chadic linguistics 8, 5375. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe.
Bolinger Dwight L. 1968. Aspects of language. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.
Bybee Joan L. 2007. Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Childs G. Tucker. 1994. African ideophones. In Hinton et al. (eds.), 178204.
Clark Herbert H. & Gerrig Richard J.. 1990. Quotations as demonstrations. Language 66.4, 764805.
Davidson Kathryn. 2015. Quotation, demonstration, and iconicity. Linguistics and Philosophy 38.6, 477520.
De Vries Mark. 2008. The representation of language within language: A syntactico-pragmatic typology of direct speech. Studia Linguistica 62.1, 3977.
Dhoorre Cabdulqaadir Salaad & Tosco Mauro. 1998. 111 Somali ideophones. Journal of African Cultural Studies 11.2, 125156.
Diffloth Gérard. 1980. Expressive phonology and prosaic phonology in Mon-Khmer. In Thongkum Theraphan L. (ed.), Studies in Mon-Khmer and Thai phonology and phonetics in honor of E. Henderson, 4959. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.
Dingemanse Mark. 2012. Advances in the cross-linguistic study of ideophones. Language and Linguistics Compass 6.10, 654672.
Dingemanse Mark. 2013. Ideophones and gesture in everyday speech. Gesture 13.2, 143165.
Dingemanse Mark, Schuerman Will, Reinisch Eva, Tufvesson Sylvia & Mitterer Holger. 2016. What sound symbolism can and cannot do: Testing the iconicity of ideophones from five languages. Language 92.2, e117e133.
Dumestre Gérard. 1998. Les idéophones: le cas du Bambara. Faits de Langues: Revue de Linguistique 11, 321333.
Enfield N. J. 2009. The anatomy of meaning: Speech, gesture, and composite utterances. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Feinstein Alvan R. & Cicchetti Domenic V.. 1990. High agreement but low Kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 43.6, 543549.
Fortune G. 1962. Ideophones in Shona: An Inaugural Lecture given in the University College of Rhodesia and Nyasaland on 28 April 1961. London & New York: Oxford University Press.
Fudge Erik. 1970. Phonological structure and ‘expressiveness’. Journal of Linguistics 6.2, 161188.
Goldin-Meadow Susan. What the hands can tell us about language emergence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1074-x. Published online by Springer, 1 July 2016.
Güldemann Tom. 2008. Quotative indexes in African languages: A synchronic and diachronic survey (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 34). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hamano Shoko S. 1998. The sound-symbolic system of Japanese. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Havránek Bohuslav. 1964. The functional differentiation of the standard language. In Garvin Paul L. (ed.), A Prague School reader on esthetics, literary structure, and style, 316. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Hinton Leanne, Nichols Johanna & Ohala John J. (eds.). 1994. Sound symbolism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hockett Charles F. 1960. The origin of speech. Scientific American 203.3, 8996.
Joseph Brian D. 1994. Modern Greek ts: Beyond sound symbolism. In Hinton et al. (eds.), 222236.
Kageyama Taro. 2007. Explorations in the conceptual semantics of mimetic verbs. In Frellesvig Bjarke, Shibatani Masayoshi & Smith John (eds.), Current issues in the history and structure of Japanese, 2782. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers.
Kakehi Hisao. 1986. The function and expressiveness of Japanese onomatopes. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters, Kobe University 13, 112.
Kelly Spencer D.In press. Exploring the boundaries of gesture–speech integration during language comprehension. In R. B. Church, Martha W. Alibali & Spencer D. Kelly (eds.), Why gesture? How the hands function in speaking, thinking and communicating. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kendon Adam. 2004. Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kita Sotaro. 1997. Two-dimensional semantic analysis of Japanese mimetics. Linguistics 35, 379415.
Klamer Marian. 2002. Semantically motivated lexical patterns: A study of Dutch and Kambera expressives. Language 78.2, 258286.
Kockelman Paul. 2010. Language, culture, and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kruspe Nicole. 2004. A grammar of Semelai. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kunene Daniel P. 1965. The ideophone in Southern Sotho. Journal of African Languages 4, 1939.
Kunene Daniel P. 2001. Speaking the act: The ideophone as a linguistic rebel. In Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz (eds.), 183191.
Le Guen Olivier. 2012. Ideophones in Yucatec Maya. Proceedings of the SSILA V Conference 26, Austin, TX.
Levelt Willem J. M. 1981. The speaker’s linearization problem. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, Biological Sciences 295.1077, 305315.
McNeill David. 1992. Hand and mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Mihas Elena. 2012. Ideophones in Alto Perene (Arawak) from Eastern Peru. Studies in Language 36.2, 300344.
Nasu Akio. 2002. Nihongo onomatope-no gokeisei-to inritu-koozo[Word formation and prosodic structure of Japanese mimetics]. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tsukuba.
Newman Paul. 2001. Are ideophones really as weird and extra-systematic as linguists make them out to be?In Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz (eds.), 251258.
Newmeyer Frederick J. 1992. Iconicity and generative grammar. Language 68.4, 756796.
Nuckolls Janis B. 1996. Sounds like life: Sound-symbolic grammar, performance, and cognition in Pastaza Quechua. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nuckolls Janis B. 2000. Spoken in the spirit of gesture: Translating sound symbolism in a Pastaza Quechua Narrative. In Sherzer Joel & Sammons Kay (eds.), Translating native Latin American verbal art, 233251. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Press.
Nygaard Lynne C., Herold Debora S. & Namy Laura L.. 2009. The semantics of prosody: Acoustic and perceptual evidence of prosodic correlates to word meaning. Cognitive Science 33.1, 127146.
Özyürek Aslı. 2014. Hearing and seeing meaning in speech and gesture: Insights from brain and behaviour. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 369.1651, 20130296.
Peirce Charles S. 1955. Logic as semiotic: The theory of signs. Philosophical writings of Peirce, 98119. New York: Dover Publications.
Potts Christopher. 2007. The expressive dimension. Theoretical Linguistics 33.2, 165198.
R Core Team. 2015. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
Reiter Sabine. 2012. Ideophones in Awetí. Ph.D. dissertation, Universität zu Köln.
Samarin William J. 1970. Inventory and choice in expressive language. Word 26, 153169.
Schultze-Berndt Eva. 2001. Ideophone-like characteristics of uninflected predicates in Jaminjung (Australia). In Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz(eds.), 355373.
Sidnell Jack. 2006. Coordinating gesture, talk, and gaze in reenactments. Research on Language & Social Interaction 39.4, 377409.
Slama-Cazacu Tatiana. 1976. Nonverbal components in message sequence: “Mixed syntax”. In McCormack William C. & Wurm Stephen A. (eds.), Language and man: Anthropological issues, 217227. Berlin: Mouton.
Son Youngsuk. 2010. Giongo/gitaigo-to miburi: Terebi-hoosoo-no maruchimedia-koopasu-ni yoru keiryoo-teki-bunseki [Relation of Japanese mimetics and gestures: A multimedia corpus-based quantitative study of Japanese television broadcasts]. Keiryoo kokugogaku [Mathematical linguistics] 27.4, 131153.
Tamori Ikuhiro. 1984. Japanese onomatopoeias: Manner adverbials vs. resultative adverbials. Jimbun ronshu: Journal of Cultural Science 20.2, 163178.
Tamori Ikuhiro. 1990. Expressiveness of Japanese and English onomatopoeic expressions. Kotoba-no utage: Kakehi Hisao-kyoozyu kanreki kinen ronsyuu [‘Linguistic fiesta’: Festschrift for Professor Hisao Kakehi’s sixtieth birthday], 287306. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers.
Tamori Ikuhiro & Schourup Lawrence. 1999. Onomatope: Keitai-to imi [Onomatopoeia: Form and meaning]. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers.
Toratani Kiyoko. 2006. On the optionality of to-marking on reduplicated mimetics in Japanese. In Vance Timothy J. & Jones Kimberly (eds.), Japanese/Korean linguistics 14, 415422. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Toratani Kiyoko. 2007. An RRG analysis of manner adverbial mimetics. Language and Linguistics 8.1, 311342.
Toratani Kiyoko. 2015. Iconicity in the syntax and lexical semantics of sound-symbolic words in Japanese. In Hiraga Masako K., Herlofsky William J., Shinohara Kazuko & Akita Kimi (eds.), Iconicity in language and literature, vol. 14, 125141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tsujimura Natsuko. 2005. A constructional approach to mimetic verbs. In Fried Mirjam & Boas Hans C. (eds.), Grammatical constructions: Back to the roots, 137154. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tsujimura Natsuko & Deguchi Masanori. 2007. Semantic integration of mimetics in Japanese. The Main Session: Papers from the Thirty-Ninth Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS 39), 339353. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Voeltz F. K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz Christa (eds.). 2001. Ideophones (Typological Studies in Language 44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Watson Richard L. 2001. A comparison of some Southeast Asian ideophones with some African ideophones. In Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz (eds.), 385405.
Westermann Diedrich Hermann. 1927. Laut, Ton und Sinn in westafrikanischen Sudansprachen. In Boas Franz (ed.), Festschrift Meinhof, 315328. Hamburg: L. Friederichsen.
Zwicky Arnold M. & Pullum Geoffrey K.. 1987. Plain morphology and expressive morphology. In Aske John, Beery Natasha, Michaelis Laura & Filip Hana (eds.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS 30), 330340. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Journal of Linguistics
  • ISSN: 0022-2267
  • EISSN: 1469-7742
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-linguistics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 108
Total number of PDF views: 462 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1217 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 4th October 2016 - 23rd January 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.