Cargando…
Why 'piss' is ruder than 'pee'? The role of sound in affective meaning making
Most language users agree that some words sound harsh (e.g. grotesque) whereas others sound soft and pleasing (e.g. lagoon). While this prominent feature of human language has always been creatively deployed in art and poetry, it is still largely unknown whether the sound of a word in itself makes a...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5991420/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29874293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198430 |
_version_ | 1783329820799664128 |
---|---|
author | Aryani, Arash Conrad, Markus Schmidtke, David Jacobs, Arthur |
author_facet | Aryani, Arash Conrad, Markus Schmidtke, David Jacobs, Arthur |
author_sort | Aryani, Arash |
collection | PubMed |
description | Most language users agree that some words sound harsh (e.g. grotesque) whereas others sound soft and pleasing (e.g. lagoon). While this prominent feature of human language has always been creatively deployed in art and poetry, it is still largely unknown whether the sound of a word in itself makes any contribution to the word’s meaning as perceived and interpreted by the listener. In a large-scale lexicon analysis, we focused on the affective substrates of words’ meaning (i.e. affective meaning) and words’ sound (i.e. affective sound); both being measured on a two-dimensional space of valence (ranging from pleasant to unpleasant) and arousal (ranging from calm to excited). We tested the hypothesis that the sound of a word possesses affective iconic characteristics that can implicitly influence listeners when evaluating the affective meaning of that word. The results show that a significant portion of the variance in affective meaning ratings of printed words depends on a number of spectral and temporal acoustic features extracted from these words after converting them to their spoken form (study1). In order to test the affective nature of this effect, we independently assessed the affective sound of these words using two different methods: through direct rating (study2a), and through acoustic models that we implemented based on pseudoword materials (study2b). In line with our hypothesis, the estimated contribution of words’ sound to ratings of words’ affective meaning was indeed associated with the affective sound of these words; with a stronger effect for arousal than for valence. Further analyses revealed crucial phonetic features potentially causing the effect of sound on meaning: For instance, words with short vowels, voiceless consonants, and hissing sibilants (as in ‘piss’) feel more arousing and negative. Our findings suggest that the process of meaning making is not solely determined by arbitrary mappings between formal aspects of words and concepts they refer to. Rather, even in silent reading, words’ acoustic profiles provide affective perceptual cues that language users may implicitly use to construct words’ overall meaning. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5991420 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-59914202018-06-08 Why 'piss' is ruder than 'pee'? The role of sound in affective meaning making Aryani, Arash Conrad, Markus Schmidtke, David Jacobs, Arthur PLoS One Research Article Most language users agree that some words sound harsh (e.g. grotesque) whereas others sound soft and pleasing (e.g. lagoon). While this prominent feature of human language has always been creatively deployed in art and poetry, it is still largely unknown whether the sound of a word in itself makes any contribution to the word’s meaning as perceived and interpreted by the listener. In a large-scale lexicon analysis, we focused on the affective substrates of words’ meaning (i.e. affective meaning) and words’ sound (i.e. affective sound); both being measured on a two-dimensional space of valence (ranging from pleasant to unpleasant) and arousal (ranging from calm to excited). We tested the hypothesis that the sound of a word possesses affective iconic characteristics that can implicitly influence listeners when evaluating the affective meaning of that word. The results show that a significant portion of the variance in affective meaning ratings of printed words depends on a number of spectral and temporal acoustic features extracted from these words after converting them to their spoken form (study1). In order to test the affective nature of this effect, we independently assessed the affective sound of these words using two different methods: through direct rating (study2a), and through acoustic models that we implemented based on pseudoword materials (study2b). In line with our hypothesis, the estimated contribution of words’ sound to ratings of words’ affective meaning was indeed associated with the affective sound of these words; with a stronger effect for arousal than for valence. Further analyses revealed crucial phonetic features potentially causing the effect of sound on meaning: For instance, words with short vowels, voiceless consonants, and hissing sibilants (as in ‘piss’) feel more arousing and negative. Our findings suggest that the process of meaning making is not solely determined by arbitrary mappings between formal aspects of words and concepts they refer to. Rather, even in silent reading, words’ acoustic profiles provide affective perceptual cues that language users may implicitly use to construct words’ overall meaning. Public Library of Science 2018-06-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5991420/ /pubmed/29874293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198430 Text en © 2018 Aryani et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Aryani, Arash Conrad, Markus Schmidtke, David Jacobs, Arthur Why 'piss' is ruder than 'pee'? The role of sound in affective meaning making |
title | Why 'piss' is ruder than 'pee'? The role of sound in affective meaning making |
title_full | Why 'piss' is ruder than 'pee'? The role of sound in affective meaning making |
title_fullStr | Why 'piss' is ruder than 'pee'? The role of sound in affective meaning making |
title_full_unstemmed | Why 'piss' is ruder than 'pee'? The role of sound in affective meaning making |
title_short | Why 'piss' is ruder than 'pee'? The role of sound in affective meaning making |
title_sort | why 'piss' is ruder than 'pee'? the role of sound in affective meaning making |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5991420/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29874293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198430 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aryaniarash whypissisruderthanpeetheroleofsoundinaffectivemeaningmaking AT conradmarkus whypissisruderthanpeetheroleofsoundinaffectivemeaningmaking AT schmidtkedavid whypissisruderthanpeetheroleofsoundinaffectivemeaningmaking AT jacobsarthur whypissisruderthanpeetheroleofsoundinaffectivemeaningmaking |