The phonesthetics of blends: A lexicographic study of cognitive blends in the OED

Open access


This preliminary study of 285 morphological and cognitive blends (attestation dates 1200-2012) aims to investigate the role of phonesthemes in the structuring of the English lexicon. A study of OED word origins shows a disparity between older (1200-1900) and recent blends (1903-2012). Sound symbolism plays an overriding role in over 50% of older blends, leading to a study of initial phonesthemes (i.e. consonant clusters). Several case studies of diachronic semantic shift attested in the OED point to the existence of multidirectional motivation ties. This preliminary study supports the psycholinguistic theory that 1) there is a structured secondary sound symbolism in English, and that 2) it is still productive today and may play a role in the creation of neologisms as well as ensuring their survival (see Bergen, 2010: 52). A more in-depth usage-based analysis using sophisticated measurement tools is the next step in the study.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Abelin Åsa (1999). Phonesthemes in Swedish. In Proceedings of XIV International Conference of Phonetic Sciences 99. 1333–1336. Berkeley University of California. (last access 16/08/13).

  • Abramova Ekaterina Raquel Fernandes & Frederico Sangati (2013). Automatic labeling of phonesthemic senses. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Cognitive Science Meeting 2013. (last access 05/01/2014).

  • Ahlner Felix & Jordan Zlatev (2010). Cross modal iconicity: A Cognitive Semiotic Approach to Sound Symbolism. Sign Systems Studies 38: 298–348.

  • Albrespit Jean (2007). Montrer cacher: la référence construite par les néologismes. L'envers du décor 47e Congrès de la SAES 54–73 Avignon.

  • Allan Kathryn (2011). Using OED data as evidence for researching semantic change. Allan Kathryn & Justinya Robinson eds. Current Methods in Historical Semantics. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter 17–40.

  • Argoud Line (2008). Les ‘mots en bl-’ du lexique anglais: étude de la structuration des données dans une optique lexico-cognitive. [bl- words in the English lexicon: lexical-cognitive corpus analysis]. Lexis 2: 43–76.

  • Argoud Line (2010). Réalité des idéophones anglais (phonesthèmes): propositions dans le cadre d’une approche de linguistique cognitive [the reality of English phonesthemes]. E-rea Revue d'études sur le monde anglophone. (last access 16/08/13).

  • Ayto John (1999). 20th Century Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Bat-El Outi (2006). Blend. Brown E. Keith ed. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics 2nd edition. Oxford: Elsevier 2.66–70.

  • Bauer Laurie (1983). English Word Formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Benczes Réka (2010). Setting limits in the production and use of metaphorical and metonymical compounds. Onysko Alexander & Sascha Michel eds. Cognitive Perspectives on Word Formation. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter 219–242.

  • Bergen Benjamin K. (2004). The psychological reality of phonaesthemes. Language 80.2 : 291–311.

  • Bergen Benjamin K. (2010). Phonesthemes: Frequency and psychological reality. Paper given at the Emory University Conference workshop. Sound Symbolism: Challenging the Arbitrariness of Language. 26-27 March 2010. (last access 16/08/13).

  • Bolinger Dwight L. (1950). Rime assonance and morpheme analysis. Word 6.2: 117–136.

  • Bolinger Dwight L. (1965). Forms of English: Accent Morpheme Order. Isamu Abe & Tetsuya Kanekiyo eds. Cambridge & Tokyo: Harvard University Press & Hokuou.

  • Bottineau Didier (2008). The submorphemic conjecture in English: towards a distributed model of the cognitive dynamics of submorphemes. Lexis 2: 19–42.

  • Boussidan Armelle Eyal Sagi & Sabine Ploux (2009). Phonaesthemic and Etymological effects on the Distribution of Senses in Statistical Models of Semantics. Proceedings of the 34th Cognitive Science Annual Meeting 2009 36–40.

  • Bragdon Janice (2008). Blends. Manuscript University of Florida Gainesville.

  • De Cuypere Ludovic (2008). Limiting the iconic: from the metatheoretical foundations to the creative possibilities of iconicity in language. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Drellishak Scott (2006). Statistical techniques for detecting and validating phonesthemes. LSA Annual Meeting. Anaheim CA.

  • Fill Alwin (2004). Remotivation and reinterpretation. Booij Geert Christian Lehmann & Joachim Mugdan eds. Morphologie: ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbuildung. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter 1615–1625.

  • Glynn Dylan (2010). Corpus-driven Cognitive semantics. Introduction to the field. Glynn Dylan & Kerstin Fischer eds. Quantitative Methods in Cognitive Semantics. Corpusdriven approaches. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter 1–42.

  • Glynn Dylan (2014a). Correspondence analysis. An exploratory technique for identifying usage patterns. Glynn Dylan & Justyna A. Robinson eds. Corpus Methods for Semantics. Quantitative Studies in Polysemy and Synonymy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins 133–179.

  • Glynn Dylan (2014b). Techniques and tools. Corpus methods and statistics for semantics. Glynn Dylan & Justyna A. Robinson eds. Corpus Methods for Semantics. Quantitative Studies in Polysemy and Synonymy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins 307–341.

  • Gries Stefan (2004). Isn’t that fantabulous? How similarity motivates intentional morphological blends in English. Achard Michel & Suzanne Kemmer eds. Language Culture and Mind. Stanford CA: CSLI 415–428.

  • Hock Hans Heinrich & Brian Joseph (2009). Language History Language Change and Language Relationship: An Introduction to Historical and Comparative Linguistics. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter. Reprint [1996].

  • Joseph Brian (1997). On the linguistics of marginality: the centrality of the periphery. Chicago Linguistic Society Language Arts & Disciplines. (last access 16/08/13).

  • Katamba Francis (2005). English Words. London: Routledge. 2nd edition. Reprint [1994].

  • Kaisse Ellen M. (2005). Word Formation and Phonology. Štekauer Pavol & Rochelle Lieber eds. Handbook of Word Formation. Dordrecht: Springer 25–47.

  • Kelly Michael H. (1998). To brunch or to brench: Some aspects of blend structure. Linguistics 36.3: 579-590.

  • Kemmer Suzanne (2003). Schemas and lexical blends. Cuyckens Hubert Thomas Berg René Dirven & Klaus-Uwe Panther eds. Motivation in Language: Studies in Honour of Günther Radden. Amsterdam: John Benjamins 69–97.

  • Kilgariff Adam & Pavel Rychly. Sketch Engine Lexical Computing Limited.

  • Lehrer Adrienne (2007). Blendalicious. Munat Judith ed. Lexical Creativity Texts and Contexts. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins 115–133.

  • Luce Paul A. & David B. Pisoni (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing 19 : 1–36.

  • Marchand Hans (1969). The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word-Formation A Synchronic-Diachronic Approach. 2nd edition. München: C.H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.

  • Martin Andrew (2007). The Evolving Lexicon. PhD dissertation UCLA. Manuscript. (last access 16/08/13).

  • Miller D. Gary (2010). Language Change and Linguistic Theory. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Miller D. Gary (2014). Lexicogenesis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Ohala John (1997). Sound Symbolism. Seoul International Conference on Linguistics (SICOL) 4: 98–103.

  • Onysko Alexander & Sascha Michel (2010). Unravelling the cognitive in word formation. Onysko Alexander & Sascha Michel eds. Cognitive Perspectives on Word Formation. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter 1–25.

  • Otis Katya & Eyal Sagi (2008). Phonaesthemes: A corpora-based analysis. Love Bradley C. Ken McRae & Vladimir M. Sloutsky eds. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. 65-70 Austin TX: Cognitive Science Society 65–70.

  • Philps Dennis (2008a). Submorphemic iconicity in the lexicon: a diachronic approach to English ‘gn’ words. Lexis 2: 125–139.

  • Philps Dennis (2008b). From mouth to eye. Smith Andrew D. Kenny Smith & Ramon Ferreri Cancho eds. The Evolution of Language. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing 251–258.

  • Pinker Stephen (2008). The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature London: Penguin.

  • Plag Ingo (2003). Word-Formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Ploux Sabine Armelle Boussidan & Hyungsuk Ji (2010). The Semantic Atlas: an interactive model of lexical representation. Proceedings of the seventh conference of International Language Resources and Evaluation Valletta Malta. N. Calzolari Nicoletta Khalid Choukri Bente Maegaard Joseph Mariani Jan Odjik Stelios Piperidis Mike Rosner & Daniel Tapias eds. European Language Resources Association (ELRA).

  • Ploux Sabine. The Semantic Atlas. Institut des Sciences Cognitives CNRS - University Lyon 1 - UMR 5015. (last access January 2014).

  • Pound Louise (1914). Blends their relation to English word formation. Anglistische Forschungen 42: 1–58.

  • Quinion Michael (1996). Through The Blender (last access 16/08/13).

  • Reay Irene Elizabeth (2009). Sound symbolism. Allan Keith ed. Concise Encyclopedia of Semantics. Oxford: Elsevier 893-901. Reprint [1994].

  • Renouf Antoinette (2013). A finer definition of neology English: the life-cycle of a word. In Hasselgard Hilde Jarle Ebeling & Signe Oksefjell Ebeling (eds.) Corpus Perspectives on Patterns of Lexis 177–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Smith Chris (nd). Tracking historical semantic shift in fl- monomorphemes in the OED. MS.

  • Štekauer Pavol & Rochelle Lieber eds. (2005). Handbook of Word-Formation. Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Szymanek Bogdan (2005). The latest trends in English word-formation. Štekauer Pavol & Rochelle Lieber eds. Handbook of Word-Formation. Dordrecht: Springer 429-448.

  • Tournier Jean (2007). Introduction descriptive à la lexicogénétique de l’anglais contemporain. Paris & Geneva: Champion-Slatkine. Reprint [1985].

  • Turney Peter D. & Patrick Pantel (2010). From frequency to meaning: Vector Space Models of semantics. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 37 : 141–188.

  • Umbreit Birgit (2010). Does love come from to love or to love from love? Why lexical motivation has to be regarded as bidirectional. Cognitive Perspectives on Word Formation Onysko Alexander & Sascha Michel (eds.) 301–333. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.

  • Veale Tony & Cristina Butnariu (2010). Harvesting and understanding on-line neologisms. Onysko Alexander & Sascha Michel eds. Cognitive Perspectives on Word Formation. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter 399-420.

  • Waugh Linda R. (1979). On the sound shape of language. Jakobson Roman & Linda R. Waugh eds. The Sound Shape of Language. Bloomington Ind. & London: Indiana University Press & Harvester 198-214.

  • Waugh Linda R. (1994). Degrees of iconicity. Journal of Pragmatics 22 : 55–70.

  • The Oxford English Dictionary (2013) online subscription version 3rd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (last access 2/01/2014).

  • Oxford English Corpus (2013) provided by Sketch Engine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • McMillan Dictionary online (2009-2013). McMillan Publishers Limited.

  • Merriam-Webster online Dictionary (2014). Encyclopedia Britannica Company.

  • Concise Oxford English Dictionary online (2013). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Urban Dictionary online (1999-2014).

Journal information
Cited By
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 364 192 8
PDF Downloads 173 112 5