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 .
