Another look at phonetic symbolism.

Phonetic symbolism and feeling of knowing

“…Taylor and Taylor (1965), criticizing current word-matching experiments, noted that "no study since Tsuru and Fries [1933] has reported a list matched better than 65% correct overall, and only 3 of 21 lists have given over 60%." These experiments, they concluded, cannot be considered as supportive of the idea of a universal phonetic symbolism.…”

“…Tripp & Slobin, 1966;Slobin, 1968). Taylor and Taylor (1965) criticized word-matching studies on several grounds, although they themselves are willing to admit the possibility of a culturally delimited phonetic symbolism, i.e., a common conception of sound-meaning relationships among speakers of a given language.…”

Effects of phonetic symbolism on paired-associate learning

“…Perhaps the most prominent sound of words that control phonetic symbolism related to the initial sound and the first vowel together with the stressed vowel (e.g., Taylor & Taylor, 1962& Taylor, , 1965. In the present study, the response terms of Conditions 1 and 2 and Conditions 4 and 5, respectively, shared both initial consonants and vowels, as well as the same types of figures (stimuli), e.g., NENE vs. NENA for repetitive vs. nonrepetitive (S).…”

“…No matter whether phonetic symbolism may be assumed to be universal (e .g., Miron, 1961) or language specific (e .g., Taylor & Taylor, 1962, 1965, provided that phonetic symbolism is based on languag{~, such symbolism is likely to be learned, along with the language itself. This is particularly true when phonetic symbolism is assumed to be language specific.…”

“…Yet, evidence beyond anecdotal or cursory observations in this area has been largely limited to studying individual words: matching words against words or nonsense syllables against nonsense syllables (subjective phonetic symbolism) and examining the lexicon of languages in terms of denotata (objective phonetic symgolism). Recently, however, De Vito and Civikly (1972) approached the issue differently and found repetition of sound within disyllables (e.g., LOLO) is reliably associated wth visual representations of homogeneity (vis-a-vis heterogeneity) and completeness (vis-a-vis incompleteness).No matter whether phonetic symbolism may be assumed to be universal (e .g., Miron, 1961) or language specific (e .g., Taylor & Taylor, 1962, 1965, provided that phonetic symbolism is based on languag{~, such symbolism is likely to be learned, along with the language itself. This is particularly true when phonetic symbolism is assumed to be language specific.…”