How arbitrary is language?

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 369, Issue 1651, 2014, Pages

  Monaghan, Padraic ^a   Shillcock, Richard C ^b,c   Christiansen, Morten H ^d,e   Kirby, Simon ^c  

^a LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^d Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

^e HASKINS LABORATORIES   (United States)

Author keywords

Arbitrariness of the sign; Language acquisition; Language evolution; Vocabulary

Indexed keywords

LANGUAGE; SIGNALING; THEORETICAL STUDY;

EID: 84905277321     PISSN: 09628436     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0299     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. de Saussure F. 1916 Course in general linguistics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
2. Hockett CF. 1960 The origins of speech. Sci. Am. 203, 89-96. (doi: 10. 1038/scientificamerican 0960-88).
3. Perniss P, Thompson RL, Vigliocco G. 2010 Iconicity as a general property of language: evidence from spoken and signed languages. Front. Psychol. 1, 227. (doi: 10. 3389/fpsyg. 2010. 00227).
4. Eco U. 1995 The search for the perfect language. London, UK: Blackwell.
5. Plato. 1961 Cratylus. In The collected dialogues (eds E Hamilton, H Cairns), pp. 421-476. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6. Bergen BK. 2004 The psychological reality of phonaesthemes. Language 80, 290-311. (doi: 10. 1353/lan. 2004. 0056).
7. Ramachandran VS, Hubbard EM. 2001 Synaesthesia: a window into perception, thought and language. J. Conscious. Stud. 8, 3-34.
8. Spector F, Maurer D. 2009 Synesthesia: a new approach to understanding the development of perception. Dev. Psychol. 45, 175-189. (doi: 10. 1037/a0014171).
9. Gasser M, Sethuraman N, Hockema S. 2010 Iconicity in expressives: an empirical investigation. In Empirical and experimental methods in cognitive/functional research (eds J Newman, S Rice), pp. 163-180. Stanford, OR: CSLI Publications.
10. Wilkins J. 1668 An essay towards a real character and a philosophical language. London, UK: Sa. Gellibrand.
11. Gasser M. 2004 The origins of arbitrariness of language. In Proc. 26th Annual Conf. of the Cognitive Science Society, Chicago, USA, 5-7 August 2004, pp. 434-439. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12. Cottrell GW, Munro P. 1988 Principal components analysis of images via back propagation. In Proc. SPIE 1001, Visual Communications and Image Processing '88: Third in a Series, 1070.
13. Monaghan P, Christiansen MH, Fitneva SA. 2011 The arbitrariness of the sign: learning advantages from the structure of the vocabulary. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 140, 325-347. (doi: 10. 1037/a0022924).
14. Hinton L, Nichols J, Ohala J (eds). 1994 Sound symbolism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15. Kantartzis K, Kita S, Imai M. 2009 Japanese soundsymbolism facilitates word learning in Englishspeaking children. In Proc. 31st Annual Conf. of the Cognitive Science Society, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 29 July-1 August 2009, pp. 591-595. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Imai M, Kita S, Nagumo M, Okada H. 2008 Sound symbolism facilitates early verb learning. Cognition 109, 54-65. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2008. 07. 015).
17. Imai M, Kita S. 2014 The sound symbolism bootstrapping hypothesis for language acquisition and language evolution. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369, 20130298. (doi: 10. 1098/rstb. 2013. 0298).
18. Kovic V, Plunkett K, Westermann G. 2010 The shape of words in the brain. Cognition 114, 19-28. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2009. 08. 016).
19. Nielsen A, Rendall D. 2012 The source and magnitude of sound-symbolic biases in processing artificial word material and their implications for language learning and transmission. Lang. Cogn. 4, 115-125. (doi: 10. 1515/langcog-2012-0007).
20. Nygaard LC, Cook AE, Namy LL. 2009 Sound to meaning correspondences facilitate word learning. Cognition 112, 181-186. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2009. 04. 001).
21. Monaghan P, Mattock K, Walker P. 2012 The role of sound symbolism in word learning. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 38, 1152-1164. (doi: 10. 1037/a0027747).
22. Ozturk O, Krehm M, Vouloumanos A. 2013 Sound symbolism in infancy: evidence for sound-shape cross-modal correspondences in 4-month-olds. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 114, 173-186. (doi: 10. 1016/j. jecp. 2012. 05. 004).
23. Walker P, Bremner JG, Mason U, Spring J, Mattock K, Slater A, Johnson S. 2010 Preverbal infants' sensitivity to synaesthetic cross-modality correspondences. Psychol. Sci. 21, 21-25. (doi: 10. 1177/0956797609354734).
24. Peña M, Mehler J, Nespor M. 2011 The role of audiovisual processing in early conceptual development. Psychol. Sci. 22, 1419-1421. (doi: 10. 1177/0956797611421791).
25. Ohala J. 1994 The frequency code underlies the soundsymbolic use of voice pitch. In Sound symbolism (eds L Hinton, J Nichols, JJ Ohala), pp. 325-347. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26. Kaas JH. 1997 Topographic maps are fundamental to sensory processing. Brain Res. Bull. 44, 107-112. (doi: 10. 1016/S0361-9230(97)00094-4).
27. Tamariz M. 2005 Exploring systematicity between phonological and context-cooccurrence representations of the mental lexicon. Mental Lexicon 3, 259-278. (doi: 10. 1075/ml. 3. 2. 05tam).
28. Huettig F, Quinlan P, McDonald S, Altmann GTM. 2006 Word co-occurrence statistics predict language-mediated eye movements in the visual world. Acta Psychol. 121, 65-80. (doi: 10. 1016/j. actpsy. 2005. 06. 002).
29. Otis K, Sagi E. 2008 Phonoaesthemes: a corporabased analysis. In Proc. 30th annual meeting of the cognitive science society (eds BC Love, K McRae, VM Sloutsky), pp. 65-70. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
30. Schütze J. 1997 Ambiguity resolution in language learning. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
31. Landauer TK, Dumais ST. 1997 A solution to Plato's problem: the latent semantic analysis theory of the acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychol. Rev. 104, 211-240. (doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 104. 2. 211).
32. Hutchins SS. 1997 The psychological reality, variability, and compositionality of English phonesthemes. Dissertation Abstracts International 59, 4500B. University Microfilms no. AAT 9901857.
33. Shillcock RC, Kirby S, McDonald S, Brew C. 2001 Filled pauses and their status in the mental lexicon. In Proc. 2001 Conf. of Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech, Edinburgh, UK, 29-31 August 2001, pp. 53-56. Edinburgh, UK: International Speech Communication Association.
34. Baayen RH, Pipenbrock R, Gulikers L. 1995 The CELEX Lexical database. Philadelphia, PA: University Pennsylvania.
35. Zipf G. 1949 Human behavior and the principle of least effort. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.
36. Monaghan P, Christiansen MH, Farmer TA, Fitneva SA. 2010 Measures of phonological typicality: robust coherence and psychological validity. Mental Lexicon 5, 281-299. (doi: 10. 1075/ml. 5. 3. 02mon).
37. Harm MW, Seidenberg MS. 2004 Computing the meaning of words in reading: cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychol. Rev. 111, 662-720. (doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 111. 3. 662).
38. Miller GA, Nicely PE. 1955 An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 27, 338-352. (doi: 10. 1121/1. 1907526).
39. Bailey TM, Hahn U. 2005 Phoneme similarity and confusability. J. Mem. Lang. 52, 347-370. (doi: 10. 1016/j. jml. 2004. 12. 003).
40. Yarkoni T, Balota D, Yap M. 2008 Moving beyond Coltheart's N: a new measure of orthographic similarity. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 15, 971-979. (doi: 10. 3758/PBR. 15. 5. 971).
41. Burnard L (ed.). 1995 British national corpus: users reference guide British national corpus, v. 1. 0. Oxford, UK: Oxford University.
42. Vigliocco G, Vinson DP, Lewis W, Garrett MF. 2004 Representing the meanings of object and action words: the featural and unitary semantic space hypothesis. Cogn. Psych. 48, 422-488. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cogpsych. 2003. 09. 001).
43. Seidenberg MS, Gonnerman LM. 2000 Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends Cogn. Sci. 4, 353-361. (doi: 10. 1016/S1364-6613(00)01515-1).
44. Cuskley C, Kirby S. 2013 Synaesthesia, crossmodality and language evolution. In Oxford handbook of synaesthesia (eds J Simner, EM Hubbard), pp. 869-907. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
45. Klein E. 1966 A comprehensive etymological dictionary of the English language: dealing with the origin of words and their sense development thus illustrating the history of civilization and culture. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
46. OED Online. 2013 Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press (accessed 5 July). See http://www. oed. com/.
47. Kuperman V, Stadthagen-Gonzalez H, Brysbaert M. 2012 Age-of-acquisition ratings for 30, 000 English words. Behav. Res. Methods 44, 978-990. (doi: 10. 3758/s13428-012-0210-4).
48. Pollatsek A, Perea R, Binder KS. 1999 The effects of 'neighborhood size' in reading and lexical decision. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perf. 24, 1142-1158. (doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 25. 4. 1142).
49. Mantel N. 1967 The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res. 27, 209-220.
50. Maurer D, Pathman T, Mondloch CJ. 2006 The shape of boubas: sound-shape correspondences in toddlers and adults. Dev. Sci. 9, 316-322. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-7687. 2006. 00495. x).
51. Haspelmath M. 2008 Frequency vs. iconicity in explaining grammatical asymmetries. Cogn. Linguist. 19, 1-33. (doi: 10. 1515/COG. 2008. 001).
52. Thompson RL, Vinson DP, Woll B, Vigliocco G. 2012 The road to language learning is iconic: evidence from British Sign Language. Psychol. Sci. 23, 1443-1448. (doi: 10. 1177/0956797612459763).
53. Diamond ME, Petersen RS, Harris JA. 1999 Learning through maps: functional significance of topographic organization in primary sensory cortex. J. Neurobiol. 41, 64-68. (doi: 10. 1002/(SICI)1097-4695(199910)41: 1, 64:: AID-NEU9. 3. 0. CO; 2-N).
54. Walsh V. 2003 A theory of magnitude: common cortical metrices of time, space and quality. Trends Cogn. Sci. 7, 483-488. (doi: 10. 1016/j. tics. 2003. 09. 002).
55. Spence C. 2011 Crossmodal correspondences: a tutorial review. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 73, 971-995. (doi: 10. 3758/s13414-010-0073-7).
56. Steyvers M, Tenenbaum JB. 2005 The large-scale structure of semantic networks: statistical analyses and a model of semantic growth. Cogn. Sci. 29, 41-78. (doi: 10. 1207/s15516709cog 2901_3).
57. Evans N, Levinson S. 2009 The myth of language universals: language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Brain Behav. Sci. 32, 429-492. (doi: 10. 1017/S0140525X09 99094X).
58. Onnis L, Christiansen MH. 2008 Lexical categories at the edge of the word. Cogn. Sci. 32, 184-221. (doi: 10. 1080/03640210701703691).
59. Farmer TA, Christiansen MH, Monaghan P. 2006 Phonological typicality influences on-line sentence comprehension. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 12 203-12 208. (doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 0602173103).
60. St. Clair MC, Monaghan P, Ramscar M. 2009 Relationships between language structure and language learning: the suffixing preference and grammatical categorization. Cogn. Sci. 33, 1319-1329. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1551-6709. 2009. 01065. x).
61. Nygaard LC, Herold DS, Namy LL. 2009 The semantics of prosody: acoustic and perceptual evidence of prosodic correlates to word meaning. Cogn. Sci. 33, 127-146. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1551-6709. 2008. 01007. x).
62. Sandler W, Lillo-Martin D. 2006 Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
63. Jaeger T. 2010 Redundancy and reduction: speakers manage syntactic information density. Cogn. Psychol. 61, 23-62. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cogpsych. 2010.02. 002).
64. Piantadosi ST, Tily H, Gibson E. 2012 The communicative function of ambiguity in language. Cognition 122, 280-291. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2011. 10. 004).