Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Phonetically correct
- Thread starter blastbass
- Start date
That doesn't really make sense. Phonetics is purely about sound, so there are no written forms of words that are phonetically correct. The orthographic spelling of a word has only an incidental connection to its pronunciation. In English, that is.
The way some words "sound" when spoken add to the meaning of the word a bit more than others, makes sense? I'm not trying to define anything here.
Some languages have a phonetic basis paralleling their spelling (Korean, for example), but English does not.
Not really. Maybe a few animal sounds, but the concept you highlight isn't an aspect of English.
Here's a light overview: Onomatopoeia - Wikipedia
Not really. Maybe a few animal sounds, but the concept you highlight isn't an aspect of English.
Here's a light overview: Onomatopoeia - Wikipedia
If you were to spell vicious phonetically it would be vishiss. I'm not sure I get what you're after.
I don't doubt that, but if you can't communicate that sense to others, we won't get anywhere. Maybe you could demonstrate what you mean by giving examples?
Give an example of a word that is pronounced in a way that adds to its meaning.
And then an example of another word where this isn't the case.
All he is trying get to say is that some words "sound like their meaning" more than others. Don't over analyze it.
"Frozen" doesn't sound all that cold but "vicious" sounds....well.....vicous.
My pick?
"Indubitably"
I never find an excuse to use it, but it just sounds like what it means.
"Frozen" doesn't sound all that cold but "vicious" sounds....well.....vicous.
My pick?
"Indubitably"
I never find an excuse to use it, but it just sounds like what it means.
Do you think some words sound better than others, just the way they sound, forget the meaning of the word, in fact it's better to try it with a language we don't understand. I live in a country that speaks more than 25 (being conservative) languages and the way they sound is very interesting, like the south indian, telugu, etc. are very percussive. This can be a starting step to understanding what I am trying to say.
Also I should have realised that the sound adding or not to the meaning of words is too personal and will be very different from person to person so examples may not be too valid..
Any better?
Using one's advanced linguistic skills to simply piss in someone's cornflakes is not a good look, homie.
Definitely. There is a good demonstration of an aspect of this called the Bouba/Kiki effect. Subjects were presented with a round and a spiky object and asked to connect those with the two (made up) words bouba and kiki. Guess how that went
It seems you have misunderstood me and my reasons for posting.
Round-bouba, spiky-kiki? Right?Definitely. There is a good demonstration of an aspect of this called the Bouba/Kiki effect. Subjects were presented with a round and a spiky object and asked to connect those with the two (made up) words bouba and kiki. Guess how that went
From the Oxford dictionary:
"The formation of a word from a sound associated with the thing it describes is known as onomatopoeia; the related adjective is onomatopoeic. Examples of this type of word include atishoo, cuckoo, croak, hiccup, miaow, ping-pong, splash, and sizzle. As these examples indicate, there is a variety of sounds that are ‘translated’ into human speech using onomatopoeias: from human exclamations and machinery, to physical and natural phenomena such as the sounds animals make."
"The formation of a word from a sound associated with the thing it describes is known as onomatopoeia; the related adjective is onomatopoeic. Examples of this type of word include atishoo, cuckoo, croak, hiccup, miaow, ping-pong, splash, and sizzle. As these examples indicate, there is a variety of sounds that are ‘translated’ into human speech using onomatopoeias: from human exclamations and machinery, to physical and natural phenomena such as the sounds animals make."
So, under the same 'experimental conditions', if cognitive psychologists were to ask people which of the imaginary words asas and newloa was faster/slower then we could equally easily predict the results too (there are several other clear priming markers in both example other than repeated letter/sound clusters)... I'd hope they didn't get too large a grant for such research...
This brings up an interesting follow-up question: does indubitably bring up more of the sense of the word than undoubtedly? Does it, for example sound more formal/archaic?
