The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics

Current Issue

Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 20

[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.180-208
Abbreviation: KASELL
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print)
Print publication date 31 Mar 2020
Received 22 May 2020 Revised 20 Jun 2020 Accepted 30 Jun 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.20..202006.180

Cross-modal Mapping in L1 Korean and L2 English Sound Symbolism
Yun, Gwanhi
Daegu University


Copyright 2020 KASELL
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits unrestricted, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Funding Information ▼

Abstract

We have investigated whether the association of sounds and shapes is observed in Korean L1 ideophones and L2 English words and pseudowords. First, we found that the linkage between shapes and sounds emerges in a limited scale with respect to Korean L1 ideophones and vowel harmony. This finding may stem from the fact that light/dark vowel distinction relating to Korean vowel harmony differs from the common vowel distinction based on front/back dimensions observed across languages. Second, in lexical decision task and explicit association test, we have shown that the correlation of visually and auditorily presented sounds and shapes takes place with regard to stop/fricative distinction. Moreover, the number of consonants contained within the words predicted the robustness of the association of the consonant type and shapes. Furthermore, it was found that round shapes were preferred for back rounded vowels and spiky shapes were associated with front vowels in L2 English. Thus, the presence or strength of the bondage of shapes and sounds might differ according to L1-specific phonological rules, L2 sound types or the type of behavioral task.


Keywords: sound symbolism, Korean vowel harmony, cross-modal correspondence, sound-shape association, lexical decision task, explicit association test

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Daegu University Research Grant, 2019. I am grateful to three anonymous reviewers for their constructive and thorough feedback and comments. All remaining errors are mine.


References
1. 김영석·이상억(Kim, Y. and S. Lee). 1993. 『현대형태론』(Modern Morphology). 학연사(Hakyeonsa).
2. 박동근(Park, D.). 2005. 울음 표현 흉내말의 연구(A study on mimetic words of crying expressions). 《한글》(Han-Geul) 247, 141-175.
3. 박동근(Park, D.). 2007. 한국어 화자의 음성상징에 대한 인지 실험(A perceptual experiment on Korean speakers’ sound symbolism). 《한말연구》(Korean Language Research) 21, 67-86.
4. 이덕영(Lee, D). 1994. 한국어의 모음 조화에 대한 새로운 해석-ATR 조화(A new interpretation of Korean vowel harmony-ATR harmony). 《한글》(Han-Geul) 223, 157-199.
5. 채완(Chae, W.). 2003. 『한국어의 의성어와 의태어(Onomatopoeia and Mimetic Words in Korean)』. 서울대학교 출판부(Seoul National University Press).
6. Akita, K., M. Imai, N. Saji, K. Kantartzis and S. Kita. 2011. Mimetic vowel harmony in Japanese. In P. Sells and B. Frellesvig, eds., Japanese/Korean Linguistics, 1-15. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
7. Bergen, B. 2004. The psychological reality of phonaesthemes. Language 80(2), 290-311.
8. Berlin, B. 1994. Evidence for pervasive synesthetic sound symbolism in ethnozoological nomenclature. In L. Hinton, J. Nichols and J. Ohala, eds., Sound Symbolism, 76-93. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9. Berlin, B. 2006. The firs congress of ethnozoological nomenclature. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 12(1), 23-44.
10. Bolinger, D. L. 1950. Rime, assonance, and morpheme. Word 6, 117-136.
11. Bremner, A. J., S. Caparos, J. Davidoff, J. Fockert, K. J. Linnell and C. Spence. 2013. “Bouba” and “Kiki” in Namibia? A remote culture make similar shape-sound matches, but different shape-taste matches to easterners. Cognition 126, 165-172.
12. Chen, Y. C., P. C. Huang, A. Woods and C. Spence. 2016. When “Bouba” equals “kiki”: cultural commonalities and cultural differences in sound-shape correspondences. Scientific Reports 6, 26681.
13. Childs, G. 2015. Sound symbolism. In J. Taylor ed., The Oxford Handbook of Word, 284-302. Oxford University Press.
14. Chung, C. W. 2000. An optimality-theoretic account of vowel harmony in Korean ideophones. Studies in Phonetics, Phonology and Morphology 6, 431-450.
15. Cuskley, C., J. Simner and S. Kirby. 2017. Phonological and orthographic influences in the bouba-kiki effect. Psychological Research 81, 119-130.
16. Diffloth, G. 1994. i:big, a:small. In L. Hinton, J. Nichols and J. Ohala, eds., Sound Symbolism, 107-114. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17. D'Onfofrio, A. 2014. Phonetic detail and dimensionality in sound-shape correspondences: Refining the bouba-kiki paradigm. Language and Speech 57, 367-393.
18. Farmer, T., M. Christiansen and P. Monaghan. 2006. Phonological typicality influences on-line sentence comprehension. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103(32), 12203.
19. Finley, S. 2006. Vowel harmony in Korean and morpheme correspondence. Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics 11, 131-144.
20. Fleming, K. K. 1993. Phonologically mediated priming in spoken and printed word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 19, 272-284.
21. Fort, M., A. Martin and S. Peperkamp. 2015. Consonants are more important than vowels in the bouba-kiki effect. Language and Speech 58, 247-266.
22. Hockett, C. 1982. The origin of speech. In W. S.-Y. Wang, ed., Human Communication: Language and Its Psychobiological Bases, 4-12. New York: Freeman.
23. Hutchins, S. 1998. The Psychological Reality, Variability, and Compositionality of English Phonaesthemes. Doctoral dissertation, Emory University. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
24. Imai, M., S. Kita, M. Nagumo and H. Okada. 2008. Sound symbolism facilitates early verb learning. Cognition 109(1), 54-65.
25. Imai, M. and S. Kita. 2014. The sound symbolism bootstrapping hypothesis for language acquisition and language evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. 369: 20130298.
26. Kanero, J., M. Imai, J. Okuda, H. Okada and T. Matsuda. 2014. How sound symbolism is processed in the brain: A study on Japanese mimetic words. PLoS ONE 9(5), e97905.
27. Knoeferle, K., J. Li, E. Maggioni and C. Spence. 2017. What drives sound symbolism? Different acoustic cues underlie sound-size and sound-shape mappings. Scientific Report 7, 5562.
28. Köhler, W. 1929. Gestalt Psychology. New York, USA: Liveright.
29. Köhler, W. 1947. Gestalt Psychology (2nd ed.). New York, USA: Liveright.
30. Kovic, V., K. Plunkett, and G. Westermann. (2010). The shaped of words in the brain. Cognition 114(1), 19-28.
31. Kwon, N. and E. R. Round. 2015. Phonaesthemes in morphological theory. Morphology 25, 1-27.
32. Laing, C. E. 2014. A phonological analysis of onomatopoeia in early word production. First Language 34(5), 387-405.
33. Maurer, D., T. Pathman, and C. Mondloch. 2006. The shape of boubas: Sound-shape correspondences in toddlers and adults. Developmental Science 9(3), 316-322.
34. Monaghan P., R. C. Shillcock, M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. 2014. How arbitrary is language? Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369, 20130299.
35. Newman, S. 1933. Further experiments in phonetic symbolism. American Journal of Psychology 47, 286-848.
36. Nuckolls, J. 1999. The case of sound symbolism. Annual Review of Anthropology 28, 225-252.
37. Nygaard, L., A. Cook and L. Namy. 2009. Sound to meaning correspondences facilitate word learning. Cognition 112, 181-186.
38. Parise, C. V. and C. Spence. 2012. Audiovisual crossmodal correspondences and sound symbolism: a study using the implicit association test. Experimental Brain Research 220, 319-333.
39. Peiffer-Smadja, N. and L. Cohen. 2019. The cerebral bases of the bouba-kiki effect. NeuroImage 186, 679-689.
40. Pickett, J. M. 1999. The Acoustics of Speech Communication. Allyn & Bacon.
41. Price, C. J. and J. T. Devlin. 2003. The myth of the visual word form area. NeuroImage 19, 473-481.
42. Ramachandran, V. S. and E. M. Hubbard. 2001. Synaesthesia-A window into perception, thought and language. Journal of Consciousness Studies 8, 3-34.
43. Sapir, E. 1929. A study in phonetic symbolism. Journal of Experimental Psychology 12, 225-239.
44. Saussure, F. 1916. Course in General Linguistics. London Duckworth.
45. Sicoli, M. 2010. Shifting voices with participant roles: Voice qualities and speech registers in Mesoamerica. Language in Society 39, 521-553.
46. Thompson, P. D. and Z. Estes. 2011. Sound symbolic naming of novel objects is a graded function. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 64(12), 2392-2404.
47. Van Rooyen, C. S., P. C. Taljaard and A. S. Davey. 1976. The Sounds of Zulu. Pretoria: University of South Africa.
48. Westbury, C. 2005. Implicit sound symbolism in lexical access: Evidence from an interference task. Brain and Language 93, 10-19.
49. Yun, G. 2018. Production and processing of phonaesthemes in L2 English. Korean Journal of Linguistics 43(4), 781-806.

Yun, Gwanhi (Professor)Dept. of English Literature and LanguageDaegu University201 Daegudaero, JinryangGyeongsan Gyeongbuk 38453Tel: 053-850-6025E-mail: ghyun@daegu.ac.kr