2016-09-14

Human Languages Use Similar Sounds for Common Words

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

by Neil Godfrey

Amazing . . . can’t wait for further research to confirm or refute . . .

Sound–meaning association biases evidenced across thousands of languages

(or doi: 10.1073/pnas.1605782113)

Or you can read a short version on the news site where I first learned about it:

Linguistic study proves more than 6,000 languages use similar sounds for common words

Or under a title I thought most apt:

A nose by any other name would sound the same, study finds

Here’s a list of the sounds taken from the original PNAS article (symbols are described here):

signal-summary

Nor can I resist the nice map from the same article:

map

Trying to think through the significance(s) should it be confirmed. . . . .

First, a universal grammar. . . . now this?

 

The following two tabs change content below.

Neil Godfrey

Neil is the author of this post. To read more about Neil, see our About page.

Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)

5 Comments

  • Gavin
    2016-09-15 05:17:30 UTC - 05:17 | Permalink

    This kind of analysis has often been dismissed by linguists as something akin to “paralellomania”; I daresay it will again here.

    • Gavin
      2016-09-15 07:29:21 UTC - 07:29 | Permalink

      Not to say it’s unreasonable – the Nostratic hypothesis (which I like) might account for it; along with various onomatopoetic ideas; but we’re at a most abstract level here.

      • Neil Godfrey
        2016-09-15 10:46:30 UTC - 10:46 | Permalink

        I’d love to follow it up in more depth if I had no other interests taking up my energies. I’m waiting to see what other related and follow-up research has to say, and of course analyses of the methods used in this study.

  • Aleph
    2016-09-29 23:43:17 UTC - 23:43 | Permalink

    Hey Neil, huge fan of the blog here! Please keep up the great work.

    I was just wondering if there was a recent study supporting Universal Grammar you had in mind, or if the last line of your entry was meant as a more general reference to the theories of Chomsky and others.

    Thanks again!

    • Neil Godfrey
      2016-09-30 05:22:03 UTC - 05:22 | Permalink

      Very general. I have not had opportunities to delve into the debates myself. I rely entirely upon what I hear among linguists themselves – or at least that very small subsection of the community I have contacted and the few I have read about.

  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.