Phonetically correct

[blastbass]

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?

It does, to me at least. Which one's older?

 

[Bettyboo]

^ I'm not saying which is older than the other; simply stating that a few dictionary definitions I looked at suggested indubitably was a more archaic form - however, in English, that specific dictionary statement is meaningless in this context because we're looking at how one says the word and if it sounds like it 'feels/means'. Thus, spelling is not meaningful in the discussion, we have different accents/dialects, etc. I don't know how the poster pronounces either indubitably or undoubtedly.

Words are contextual and conventional.

 

[blastbass]

^ I'm not saying which is older than the other; simply stating that a few dictionary definitions I looked at suggested indubitably was a more archaic form - however, in English, that specific dictionary statement is meaningless in this context because we're looking at how one says the word and if it sounds like it 'feels/means'. Thus, spelling is not meaningful in the discussion, we have different accents/dialects, etc. I don't know how the poster pronounces either indubitably or undoubtedly.

Words are contextual and conventional.

You're right, too many variables.

 

[Bettyboo]

It is obviously fun to play with words, particularly in a creative sense. &, if you feel something with a word then that's real to you and meaningful. My wife is babababo - that's meaningful to me...

Once words are analyzed, they become particularly boring and less glamorous due to the reality that our social conventions and our neuronal functions (how words are formed from many smaller parts all over the brain and heavily contextualized/primed which means they simple generate different meanings at different times - how else could creative language and metaphors be possible?) govern language. The Oxford dictionary explanation for onomatopoeia is decades out of date and plain wrong; they should really update it, but then again dictionary writers are by definition just detailing layman knowledge.

Here's an interesting thought experiment: if I have an identical twin and we say the most simple word that has some parallel meaning for us through sound/pronunciation, let's say moo sounding like the sound a cow makes, then if I have an accident, crack my jaw, and say the word differently then: 1) does it now change it's sound/meaning relationship to me; 2) do I now think of the word differently from my identical twin?

 

[hrodbert696]

Sort of a tangent, but JRR Tolkien wrote about the aesthetics of language. His point was that there were words and expressions that were aesthetically pleasing regardless of the meaning of the words - or not. "Beautiful" is not a very beautiful word, it's kind of ungainly. "Cellar door," on the other hand, has a lovely flow to it, even though it doesn't refer to a lovely thing.

 

[hrodbert696]

Onomatopoeia is really only when the word describes a sound, and actually sounds like the sound it refers to - like "buzz" or "smack." I think that there are some words which, as the OP says, are not strictly onomatopoetic but which do have a phonetic quality that reinforces the meaning. "Gunk," for instance. English (and I think Germanic words that English draws on) has a whole string of terms starting in G- or Gr-, IIRC, that all have implications of violence, mess, chaos, and monstrosity. Grendel (the monster in Beowulf), Grind, Grim, Grate, Groan, etc. It seems that to our Germanic ancestors that gr-sound just had a dark quality to it.

 

[Bettyboo]

"Gunk," for instance. English (and I think Germanic words that English draws on) has a whole string of terms starting in G- or Gr-, IIRC, that all have implications of violence, mess, chaos, and monstrosity. Grendel (the monster in Beowulf), Grind, Grim, Grate, Groan, etc.

Interesting, but it's cultural convention rather than "gr" innately sounding violent. The word 'devil' has certain connotations, but these are not part of the letter/sound "d", "e", "v", "i" or "l"; it's cultural convention.

 

[two fingers]

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?

If I had to guess I would say the origin of the word "indubitably" was some drunk snooty guy try to say undoubtedly.

 

[hrodbert696]

Interesting, but it's cultural convention rather than "gr" innately sounding violent. The word 'devil' has certain connotations, but these are not part of the letter/sound "d", "e", "v", "i" or "l"; it's cultural convention.

Language itself is cultural convention, so I'm not claiming the connotation is "innate" or inherent. It's still cultural. But the thing about the string of words with gr- I listed is that they DON'T derive from a shared root word. Rather, within the proto-Germanic culture that lies behind English, there really does seem to have been an intuitive association of "gr-" with these kinds of harsh, dark meanings. I wouldn't assume that a Chinese or Armenian speaker would have the same associations.

Obviously I wouldn't say the same is true of all words. The thing about "devil" is that no part of the word resonates with words with similar overtones. "Level" doesn't have the same dark associations, neither does "denim."

Another curiosity - nearly every language, even in unrelated language families, has similar words for mother and father, based on ma- or da- or pa-/fa-. It's not hard to understand why, those are some of the first sounds a baby's mouth can form and eager parents rapidly teach the child to associate the sounds with themselves. What's funny, though, is that in the Georgian language, the referents are reversed from the rest of the world - Father is "mama" and mother is "deda."

 

[middlebit]

Round-bouba, spiky-kiki? Right?

Exactly, that's what people generally pick. But there are exceptions and conventions that are very different form language to language. For example, my first language is Danish, and the thing about Danish that is usually the most difficult aspect for native English-speakers to grasp is the way we emphasise - or, rather, don't emphasise, words. So while there is some overlap in terms of English-speakers being able to relate to the sound of certain Danish words, and vice-versa, there are still plenty of words where this is not the case. Danes would also make the bouba - round, kiki - spiky-connection, but the Danish words for "pimple" is "bums" which doesn't have the same "pop" sounds associated with it.

 

[blastbass]

Exactly, that's what people generally pick. But there are exceptions and conventions that are very different form language to language. For example, my first language is Danish, and the thing about Danish that is usually the most difficult aspect for native English-speakers to grasp is the way we emphasise - or, rather, don't emphasise, words. So while there is some overlap in terms of English-speakers being able to relate to the sound of certain Danish words, and vice-versa, there are still plenty of words where this is not the case. Danes would also make the bouba - round, kiki - spiky-connection, but the Danish words for "pimple" is "bums" which doesn't have the same "pop" sounds associated with it.

But it does sound like bumps and that makes total sense

 

[Gravedigger Dav]

I'm afraid not.

I'm afraid you are completely incorrect in both your posts.

 

[blastbass]

Hello Dave, long time no see..

 

[Gravedigger Dav]

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.

It is absurd to think such an example could be done in writing. Perhaps you might say the pronunciation might say it add to the meaning in context.
Is English your native language?

 

[blastbass]

It is absurd to think such an example could be done in writing. Perhaps you might say the pronunciation might say it add to the meaning in context.
Is English your native language?

It isn't he has mentioned that... also it makes sense to me at least.

 

[blastbass]

Immi!!!

 

[Immigrant]

Hey Baba!

I sometimes say the F word and it totally can be said in different ways to reflect what I mean.

It's very different if I scream it after a bad golf shot compared to if I'm whispering it into an ear.

 

[blastbass]

Hey Baba!

I sometimes say the F word and it totally can be said in different ways to reflect what I mean.

It's very different if I scream it after a bad golf shot compared to if I'm whispering it into an ear.

Hey Immi!!!!!!
Hahaha i can totally relate to that baba Some other words like that too.

 

[Immigrant]

Oh F me!

Zsa Zsa Gabor croaked.

See?

 

[10cc]

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."

I don't wanna see ya speaking in a foreign tongue