Balloons and bavoons versus spikes and shikes: ERPs reveal shared neural processes for shape–sound-meaning congruence in words, and shape–sound congruence in pseudowords

Five mechanisms of sound symbolic association

“…An example of this could be when a word denoting something small contains phonemes that are sound symbolically associated with smallness (i.e., an instance of indirect iconicity, discussed later). These congruencies can have effects on language learning (e.g., Asano et al, 2015;Imai, Kita, Nagumo, & Okada, 2008;Perry, Perlman, & Lupyan, 2015; for a review, see Imai & Kita, 2014) and processing (e.g., Kanero, Imai, Okuda, Okada, & Matsuda, 2014;Lockwood & Tuomainen, 2015;Sučević, Savić, Popović, Styles, & Ković, 2015). Moreover, sound symbolic associations have also been shown to impact cognition more broadly, including effects on action (Parise & Pavani, 2011;Rabaglia, Maglio, Krehm, Seok, & Trope, 2016;Vainio, Schulman, Tiippana, & Vainio, 2013;Vainio, Tiainen, Tiippana, Rantala, & Vainio, 2016), memory (Lockwood, Hargoort, & Dingemanse, 2016;Nygaard, Cook, & Namy, 2009;Preziosi & Coane, 2017), and categorization (Ković, Plunkett, & Westermann, 2010;Lupyan & Casasanto, 2015; for a recent review of sound symbolism effects, see Lockwood & Dingemanse, 2015).…”

Neural Basis of the Sound-Symbolic Crossmodal Correspondence Between Auditory Pseudowords and Visual Shapes

“…This was in contrast to earlier studies which simply relied on reverse inference in the absence of localizer scans (Peiffer-Smadja, 2010, unpublished thesis, Université Paris Descartes) or used localizers reflecting the perceptual domains to which the pseudowords were intended to refer, rather than specifically addressing the underlying mechanisms (Revill et al, 2014). Finally, we employed fMRI which offers greater anatomical resolution than the EEG paradigms of some prior studies (e.g., Ković et al, 2010;Sučević et al, 2015;Lockwood et al, 2016). As noted above, our findings are subject to the caveat that overlaps between functional localizers and the pseudoword-shape task activations serve as a spur to further research rather than guaranteeing that the mechanism has been conclusively identified.…”

“…Crossmodal sound-symbolic associations exist in natural language as well as for pseudowords, for example, 'balloon' and 'spike' for rounded and pointed shapes (Sučević et al, 2015;Blasi et al, 2016). Familiar words such as these have established semantic, as well as sound-symbolic, associations.…”

“…There have been relatively few studies of the neural basis of sound symbolism, and drawing inferences about underlying mechanisms from these is problematic for several reasons. Firstly, some studies employed a variety of sound-symbolic words (Ković et al, 2010;Revill et al, 2014;Sučević et al, 2015;Lockwood et al, 2016), but there may be different mechanisms for different sound-symbolic effects (Sidhu & Pexman, 2017). Secondly, although an earlier neuroimaging study employed functional localizers for the domains of shape and motion referred to by the pseudowords that were used, this study was not designed to distinguish between potential mechanisms (Revill et al, 2014).…”

“…Secondly, although an earlier neuroimaging study employed functional localizers for the domains of shape and motion referred to by the pseudowords that were used, this study was not designed to distinguish between potential mechanisms (Revill et al, 2014). Lastly, EEG studies (Ković et al, 2010;Sučević et al, 2015;Lockwood et al, 2016), while providing excellent temporal information, may not have sufficient anatomical resolution to define the relevant brain regions.…”