John, List ... Their was but a smattering of examples in the article but of the ones I saw they're I would not say there very convincing.
Regards, Jon On 3/14/2017 2:31 PM, John Collier wrote: > The usual view is that except for some onomatopoetic words, > the connection between words and there objects is arbitrary. > Apparently this is not true in general, at least across many > unrelated languages for a set of basic words. See: > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/16/universal-language-sound-associations-meaning-linguistics > > This means that many words have a non-obvious iconic character > that goes beyond their mere sound-feeling. > > John Collier > Emeritus Professor and Senior Research Associate > Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal > http://web.ncf.ca/collier > -- inquiry into inquiry: https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/ academia: https://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey oeiswiki: https://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
