User:Jahsonic/The linguistic sign is not arbitrary
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
←Older revision | Newer revision→
Related e |
Featured: |
The linguistic sign is not arbitrary!
Is the Bouba/kiki effect an instance of or proof of a universal language ruled by sound symbolism?
I am inclined to answer affirmatively to that question.
Not only does 95% of the informants assign "kiki" to the angular shape and "bouba" to the curvilinear shape, informal research conducted by myself indicates that when informants are asked which of the two shapes is the 'smart' one and which is the 'dumb' one, "kiki" is usually designated as the smart one (remember, sharp in English also means intelligent) and "bouba" the dumb one (likewise, dull means not intelligent).
This means that shapes can be connected both to sounds and to affects.
These findings have implications for the evolution of language, because it suggests that the naming of objects is not completely arbitrary, as French linguist de Saussure in his canonical Course in General Linguistics (1916) stated.
- The bond between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary. Since I mean by sign the whole that results from the associating of the signifier with the signified, I can simply say: the linguistic sign is arbitrary. [1]source
I was surprised not to see the Bouba/kiki effect in The Search for the Perfect Language (The Making of Europe) by Umberto Eco.
See also