نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دکترای زبان شناسی، گروه زبان‌شناسی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
2 استادیار گروه زبان‌شناسی و عضو مرکز تحقیقات میان‌رشته‌ای زبان و ادبیات دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The study, identification, and explanation of the relationship between linguistic signs and their referents have been topics explored by thinkers in various fields, from philosophy to linguistics. Plato's Cratylus, for instance, delves into the connection between words and their meanings, discussing whether words have intrinsic and real meanings or if the relationship between linguistic signs is conventional. Naturalists also viewed language as a representation of the inherent truth of the universe, believing that each linguistic sign genuinely represents what it refers to.
In Greek philosophy, conventionalists divided the linguistic sign into two parts: the mental structure and the phonetic structure. They argued that while the mental structure related to a concept is the same for all individuals and languages, the differences between speakers of different languages lie in the choice of a phonetic structure for a specific concept, leading to variations in words and the formation of different languages. Later semiotic theories, like Saussure's, introduced the conventional nature of the phonetic structure. In contrast to his philosophical predecessors, Saussure introduced the signified, or mental structure, which Aristotle and his followers considered a fixed and common denominator—an agreed-upon concept.
Later semiotic theories, like Saussure's, introduced the conventional nature of the phonetic structure. In contrast to his philosophical predecessors, Saussure introduced the signified, or mental structure, which Aristotle and his followers considered a fixed and common denominator—an agreed-upon concept.
Throughout history, philosophers and linguists have approached these enduring problems from various perspectives. Onomatopoeia, a small group of words that represent a vocal imitation of sounds associated with them in nature, has been presented as evidence supporting the theory of a natural connection between linguistic form and meaning. Onomatopoeia enhances iconicity, which refers to the relationship of resemblance or similarity between the form and meaning of a sign.
From an iconicity perspective, onomatopoeias are "a group of new or conventional words based on the perception of similarity between a part of their phonetic form and the reference or an independent phoneme related to the source of the phoneme" (Benczes, 2019). The formation of onomatopoeia does not necessarily rely on an objective similarity between the word and its reference; the mental perception of such similarity is sufficient.
However, many onomatopoeias exhibit a direct or indirect iconic connection to their source. Thus, within the realm of iconicity, phonetic representation takes two main forms. The first form, known as "direct iconicity," involves a word that directly imitates the intended sound in such a way that hearing it evokes the natural sound in the listener's mind (Masuda, 2002). For example, the word "cuckoo" sounds similar to the sound made by a specific bird, creating a recognizable association for speakers of the language.
Van Humboldt (Mueller-Vollmer & Messling, 2017) distinguished between indirect iconicity and its direct counterpart. He referred to a set of words that, instead of directly mimicking the sound heard in nature, reconstruct the auditory effect of that sound on the listener's perception. In this case, rather than replicating the sound itself, the word captures the effect or impression of the sound. For instance, the feeling of pain, movement, happiness, or characteristics like color, sex, tenderness, roughness, softness, distance, or closeness are represented through the letter "Ava," forming what is known as an "ideophone."
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)