Literature DB >> 24349684

Early sound symbolism for vowel sounds.

Ferrinne Spector1, Daphne Maurer2.   

Abstract

Children and adults consistently match some words (e.g., kiki) to jagged shapes and other words (e.g., bouba) to rounded shapes, providing evidence for non-arbitrary sound-shape mapping. In this study, we investigated the influence of vowels on sound-shape matching in toddlers, using four contrasting pairs of nonsense words differing in vowel sound (/i/ as in feet vs. /o/ as in boat) and four rounded-jagged shape pairs. Crucially, we used reduplicated syllables (e.g., kiki vs. koko) rather than confounding vowel sound with consonant context and syllable variability (e.g., kiki vs. bouba). Toddlers consistently matched words with /o/ to rounded shapes and words with /i/ to jagged shapes (p < 0.01). The results suggest that there may be naturally biased correspondences between vowel sound and shape.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cross-modal perception; naturally biased associations; perceptual development; sensory associations; sound symbolism

Year:  2013        PMID: 24349684      PMCID: PMC3859567          DOI: 10.1068/i0535

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Iperception        ISSN: 2041-6695


Some relationships between sound and meaning are not arbitrary and can be understood universally (e.g., Berlin, 1994; Imai, Kita, Nagumo, & Okada, 2008; Nuckolls, 1999; Nygaard, Cook, & Namy, 2009). For example, across languages, objects that are larger or darker tend to be named by words containing the vowels a and o (e.g., Day, 2004; Nuckolls, 1999; Tanz, 1971). These sound symbolic regularities allow adults to categorize words in unknown foreign languages (e.g., Berlin, 1994). Sound symbolism is also evident in the associations between objects and nonsense words. Adults and children as young as 2.5 years associate rounded and jagged shapes with different nonsense words (e.g., bouba; maluma vs. takete; kiki, respectively; Davis, 1961; Kohler, 1929; Lindauer, 1990; Maurer, Pathman, & Mondloch, 2006; Ramachandran & Hubbard, 2001). Our sensitivity to such sound symbolism may have affected the evolution of languages and may influence children's language development (e.g., Imai et al., 2008; Ramachandran & Hubbard, 2001). As a child acquires vocabulary, words that make use of these natural correspondences may be easier to learn (Nuckolls, 1999; Smith & Sera, 1992). These effects have been attributed to the roundness of the vowel, that is, the shape of the mouth and lips when producing it (Justice, 2001). However, there were also variations in the consonants (e.g., bouba vs. kiki) and in the amount of variability within the words (e.g., kiki vs. maluma). The purpose of this study was to examine whether children at the age of the vocabulary explosion—namely 2.5-year-olds—are sensitive to sound symbolism for vowels. The method was identical to our previous study with toddlers (Maurer et al., 2006) except that the contrasting words differed only in their vowels, always in the context of a reduplicated consonant (see Table 1). The contrasting vowels (/o/ as in boat and /i/ as in feet) differed in vowel roundness, as well as whether the tongue is in the back or front of the mouth. Toddlers (n = 20, 11 male; range 30–36 months, mean = 34 months) participated in a “game” consisting of eight trials, at the start of which the experimenter attracted the child's attention to her face. The four experimental trials involved the presentation of two words (e.g., kiki and koko) with two contrasting unfamiliar shapes, one jagged and one smooth, and a forced choice to match one of the words to a shape (e.g., “Can you point to the koko?”). For each contrast, half of the children were asked for the object with the /i/ label and half for the object with the /o/ label, with each child receiving an equal number of /i/ and /o/ requests across the four trials. The four validity trials were designed to evaluate understanding of the task and consisted of a forced choice between familiar objects (e.g., “Which one is the rooster?”).
Table 1.

The pairs of words used during the four experimental trials, each of which contrasted the rounded back vowel /o/ and the non-rounded front vowel /i/ (as in beet).

Stop consonantsWord lists
GGigiGogo
BBibiBobo
KKikiKoko
DDidiDodo
Children associated the words with /o/ with rounded shapes and the words with /i/ with angular shapes significantly more often than chance (mean = 0.65, t(19) = 3.11 p = 0.006, one-tailed; Figure 1). This effect was present whether the child was asked for the match to the /o/ vowel (mean = 0.68) or the /i/ vowel (mean = 0.63). It was consistent across consonant contexts (Figure 1) except for the consonant k.
Figure 1.

Mean proportion (+1 s.e.) of toddlers' choices in the expected direction (rounded back vowel – rounded shape; non-rounded front vowel – jagged shape). The black dotted line indicates the level expected by chance. Bars to the left indicate the overall influence of vowel sound on shape choice, and asterisks indicate proportions greater than chance. Bars to the right of the grey dotted line indicate the results for each consonant context. Because each child received only one trial of each type, we did not perform statistics separately for each consonant context.

Mean proportion (+1 s.e.) of toddlers' choices in the expected direction (rounded back vowel – rounded shape; non-rounded front vowel – jagged shape). The black dotted line indicates the level expected by chance. Bars to the left indicate the overall influence of vowel sound on shape choice, and asterisks indicate proportions greater than chance. Bars to the right of the grey dotted line indicate the results for each consonant context. Because each child received only one trial of each type, we did not perform statistics separately for each consonant context. These results show for the first time that when nonsense words differ only in vowel sound, children as young as 2.5 years old match rounded shapes to words with rounded back vowels and jagged shapes to words with non-rounded front vowels. There may also be an effect of consonant sound, as there is in adults (e.g., Nielsen & Rendall, 2011), but that possibility was not tested here. Our findings may have resulted from children's learning the statistical regularities of English words. However, it is also possible that this effect represents a naturally biased association between the characteristics of the phoneme (its sound, the lip and mouth shape when someone else produces it or one produces it oneself) and the objects named and that these natural associations influenced the evolution of languages (Ramachandran & Hubbard, 2001). Within this framework, words used to represent more jagged objects would tend to have phonemes that do not round the mouth, taking advantage of natural biases. By the time a child is 2.5 years old, the combination of the natural bias and sensitivity to statistical regularities in sound–meaning mappings that evolved from it would jointly influence the continued acquisition of vocabulary. Whatever the origins, our results indicate that sound symbolism for vowels influences toddlers' mapping of words to objects and hence the ease with which they will acquire new vocabulary.
  7 in total

1.  The fitness of names to drawings. A cross-cultural study in Tanganyika.

Authors:  R DAVIS
Journal:  Br J Psychol       Date:  1961-08

2.  Sound to meaning correspondences facilitate word learning.

Authors:  Lynne C Nygaard; Allison E Cook; Laura L Namy
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2009-05-17

3.  Sound symbolism facilitates early verb learning.

Authors:  Mutsumi Imai; Sotaro Kita; Miho Nagumo; Hiroyuki Okada
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2008-10-05

4.  The sound of round: evaluating the sound-symbolic role of consonants in the classic Takete-Maluma phenomenon.

Authors:  Alan Nielsen; Drew Rendall
Journal:  Can J Exp Psychol       Date:  2011-06

5.  Sound symbolism in words relating to proximity and distance.

Authors:  C Tanz
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  1971 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.500

6.  The shape of boubas: sound-shape correspondences in toddlers and adults.

Authors:  Daphne Maurer; Thanujeni Pathman; Catherine J Mondloch
Journal:  Dev Sci       Date:  2006-05

7.  A developmental analysis of the polar structure of dimensions.

Authors:  L B Smith; M D Sera
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 3.468

  7 in total
  7 in total

1.  Phonological and orthographic influences in the bouba-kiki effect.

Authors:  Christine Cuskley; Julia Simner; Simon Kirby
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2015-09-24

2.  Sharp and round shapes of seen objects have distinct influences on vowel and consonant articulation.

Authors:  L Vainio; M Tiainen; K Tiippana; A Rantala; M Vainio
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-06-15

Review 3.  Iconicity in the lab: a review of behavioral, developmental, and neuroimaging research into sound-symbolism.

Authors:  Gwilym Lockwood; Mark Dingemanse
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-08-24

4.  An introduction to the special issue on Multisensory Perception.

Authors:  Kenzo Sakurai; Norimichi Kitagawa; Yôiti Suzuki
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2013-06-03

5.  When "Bouba" equals "Kiki": Cultural commonalities and cultural differences in sound-shape correspondences.

Authors:  Yi-Chuan Chen; Pi-Chun Huang; Andy Woods; Charles Spence
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-05-27       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  The Bouba-Kiki Phenomenon Tested via Schematic Drawings of Facial Expressions: Further Validation of the Internal Simulation Hypothesis.

Authors:  Sethu Karthikeyan; Bianca Rammairone; Vijayachandra Ramachandra
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2016-02-29

7.  Glyph guessing for 'oo' and 'ee': spatial frequency information in sound symbolic matching for ancient and unfamiliar scripts.

Authors:  Nora Turoman; Suzy J Styles
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 2.963

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.