is performed by the agentive participant *kamba* ‘turtle’, which functions as the subject argument of both ideophonic predicates.

The whole sentence is verbless: ideophones express events which would otherwise be expressed by inflected verbs in a sequence of independent clauses, and the remaining constituents express the participants of the event (i.e. *iye kamba* ‘he the turtle’ in (39) as subject argument) and optionally, adjuncts (i.e. ṅkʰundu-ṇkʰundu mwa ņyira mure ‘on that side of the path’ as locative adjunct).

(39) então iye kamba míyó:: ṅkʰundu-ṇkʰundu mwa ņyira mure pʰé::

então iye kamba míyó:: ṅ-kʰundu-ṇkʰundu

then PRO3SG 1a.turtle IDEO(fleeing to hide) 18-9(side-RED

mu-a ņyira mure pʰé::

AGRP18-CONN 9.path 18.DEM.III IDEO(staying still and watch)

‘Then, (he) the turtle fled and hid on that side of the path, he stayed still and watched.’ (Story_HareTurtle_#90-91)

Very often, the ideophone forms an independent (verbless) clause on its own, and the previously expressed agent does not need to be repeated. In (40), the ideophone *tsari-tsari* is used alone to depict the action of convulsing before dying endured by the cobra (*nyoka*), mentioned previously in the sentence. In (41), the ideophone *kwíz*, which depicts the action of entering discretely, is integrated into a sequence of events performed by the turtle, whose identity is known from context.

(40) ṅkazace ure azakabuka mbasiya nyoka iri pepare tsari-tsari

[η-kazi = ace ure a-za-ka-buka]MAIN [mba-siya nyoka]SUB

1-woman = POSS3SG 1.DEM.III SP1-AM.VTV?-PST.IPFV-go.out CVB-leave 9.cobra

[i-ri pepare]INDPDT [tsari-tsari]INDPDT

SP9-be 16.DEM.III IDEO(having last convulsions before dying)

‘That woman had just gone out and left the cobra (it is) there having its last convulsions.’ (Story_AvengingCobra_#79)

(41) fika patʰendere kwíz:: iye amona suro akwenda

[fika pa-tʰendere]INDPDT [kwíz::]INDPDT

arrive.NARR 16-5.bush IDEO(fit in, enter to hide)

[iye a-mu-ona suro]MAIN [a-ku-enda]SUB

PRO3SG SP1.PFV-OP1-see 9.hare SP1-PRS.PROG-go
‘He arrived at the bush, entered in it not to be seen. He saw the hare going.’
(Story_HareTurtle_#96)

In (42), the ideophone *dedzúdedzú* refers to the act of flapping around when out of one’s environment, typically used for caught fish or birds. In the preceding sentence, we have learned that the hare ate the bait and got caught on the hook. Notably, it is employed with the comitative pronominal phrase *naye*, literally ‘with him’, which is a recurrent device in Sena oral speech, mostly found after verbs (more research is needed to better understand its function).

(42) ... *amaŋga* | *dedzúdedzú naye* | *pinaβʰuseye kunja kure, "caa, baa kamba ndiwe!"*

[a-maŋga]_{INDPDT} **[dedzú-dedzú]** **na-iye**_{INDPDT}

SP1.PFV-tie IDEO(flapping.around)-RED COM-PRO3SG

[pi-na-μ-βʰusa = iye kunja kure]_{SUB}

AGRP8-PRS-OP1-pull.REL = PRO1 17.out 17.DEM.III

[caa baa kamba ndiwe]_{INDPDT}

INTERJ friend.VOC 9.turtle COP.PRO2SG

‘... he (the hare) got caught. He flapped around desperately. When he (the turtle) pulls him out there: (the hare said) “Oooh, my friend Turtle, it’s you?!"’

(Story_HareTurtle_#135)

Note that prosody is not always indicative of the independent status of ideophonic predicates: whereas a neat break (represented by | in the first line) is heard around *dedzúdedzú naye* in (42), *tsari-tsari* in (40) and *kwí*: in (41) are not prosodically detached from the rest of the sentence.

In addition to subject arguments, certain ideophonic predicates may also take objects with the role of theme or instrumental-comitative complements. In (43), the theme participant *kaderace* ‘his chair’ functions as the object of the following ideophonic predicate *kwê*: ‘pushing’, and the transitive construction literally reads as ‘the chair (he) pushed’. Note that depending on their discourse topicality, it is common for objects constituents to occur before the lexical verb. Although a dedicated study on information structure remains to be done, the object - ideophonic predicate order in (43) seems to instantiate a predicate-centered focus. In the same sentence, the second ideophone *náwa* ‘sitting’ also functions predicatively, but only takes the (agentive) subject argument mentioned earlier in the story, i.e. the lion.
‘He arrived at the bush, entered in it not to be seen. He saw the hare going.’
(Story_HareTurtle_#96)

In (42), the ideophone *dedzúdedzú* refers to the act of flapping around when out of one’s environment, typically used for caught fish or birds. In the preceding sentence, we have learned that the hare ate the bait and got caught on the hook. Notably, it is employed with the comitative pronominal phrase *naye*, literally ‘with him’, which is a recurrent device in Sena oral speech, mostly found after verbs (more research is needed to better understand its function).

(42) ... *amaŋga* | *dedzúdedzú naye* | *pinaβʰuseye kunja kure, "caa, baa kamba ndiwe!"*

[a-maŋga]_{INDPDT} [deDzú-deDzú]_{na-iye}^{INDPDT}

SP1.PFV-tie IDEO(flapping.around)-RED COM-PRO3SG

[pi-na-ṃ-βʰusa = iye kunja kure]_{SUB}

AGRP8-PRS-OP1-pull.REL = PRO1 17.out 17.DEM.III

[caa baa kamba ndiwe]_{INDPDT}

INTERJ friend.VOC 9.turtle COP.PRO2SG

‘... he (the hare) got caught. He flapped around desperately. When he (the turtle) pulls him out there: (the hare said) “Oooh, my friend Turtle, it’s you?! ”
(Story_HareTurtle_#135)

Note that prosody is not always indicative of the independent status of ideophonic predicates: whereas a neat break (represented by | in the first line) is heard around *dedzúdedzú naye* in (42), *tsari-tsari* in (40) and *kwí*: in (41) are not prosodically detached from the rest of the sentence.

In addition to subject arguments, certain ideophonic predicates may also take objects with the role of theme or instrumental-comitative complements. In (43), the theme participant *kaderace* ‘his chair’ functions as the object of the following ideophonic predicate *kwê*: ‘pushing’, and the transitive construction literally reads as ‘the chair (he) pushed’. Note that depending on their discourse topicality, it is common for objects constituents to occur before the lexical verb. Although a dedicated study on information structure remains to be done, the object - ideophonic predicate order in (43) seems to instantiate a predicate-centered focus. In the same sentence, the second ideophone *náwa* ‘sitting’ also functions predicatively, but only takes the (agentive) subject argument mentioned earlier in the story, i.e. the lion.
(43) [paŋga ŋkazace “ndo’ kapʰike ine ndinakʰara pano”,] kaderace kwê: náwa

kaderace

kwê:

náwa

9.chair.POSS3SG

IDEO(pushing)

IDEO(sitting)

‘(He (the lion) said to his wife: “go and cook, I’ll stay here!”,) he pushed the chair and sat.’ (Story_HareLion_#28)

As in (37), the ideophones in (43) are juxtaposed without a pause between them. In (44), the ideophone *físu* ‘pulling the hook (when catching fish)’ takes the instrumental adjunct *nao* ‘with it’ referring to the fishing pole mentioned in the preceding clause. Again, the adjunct precedes the ideophone. This order is not rigid though. In (45), for instance, the adjunct *na manyadzo* ‘with shame’ follows the ideophonic predicate *tsuri-tsuri*.

(44) *iye akamedza, pidamaŋgeye nyama mbafisura ŋtete wace, nao físu!*

iye

a-ka-medza

pi-da-maŋga = eye

PRO3SG SP1-PST.IPFV-fish

AGRP8-PFV.REL-catch = PRO1

9.fish

mba-fisura

n̩-tete

o-ace

nao

físu

CVB.SP1-pull.hook 3-fishing.pole AGRP3-POSS3SG with.PRO3SG IDEO(pulling hook)

‘He was fishing. When he caught a fish, he pulled his fishing pole, he pulled the hook with it.’ (Elicitation)

(45) *ntsikana, tsuri-tsuri na manyadzo, nde munaronga iye...*

n̩-tsikana

tsuri-tsuri

na

ma-nyadzo

1-girl

IDEO(looking down shamefully)

with

6-shame

nde mu-na-roŋga

iye

COP

AGRP18-PRS-speak.REL PRO3SG

‘The girl, looking down with shame, it is then she said...’

(Poem_Pakubvundzira)

Ideophonic predicates may be part of complex sentences where they function as the main (verbless) clause embedding a subordinate clause. In (46), the ideophone *odzí-odzí-odzí-odzí*, conveying the concept of walking feebly, without strength, functions as the main (verbless) clause introduced by the adverbial subordinate clause of condition/time *aŋgafamba* ‘if/when she walks.’ In (47), triplicated *bwekúbweku* ‘gabbling, making a lot of noise’ is introduced by the locative relative clause *panakʰaraco* ‘where she is.’ In (48), *pʰé*:: acts as the predicate of *iye kʰoŋgo* ‘he the
(43) [paŋga ŋkazace “ndo’ kapʰike ine ndinakʰara pano”,] kaderace kwê: náwa

kaderace

kwê:

náwa

9.chair.POSS3SG

IDEO(pushing)

IDEO(sitting)

‘(He (the lion) said to his wife: “go and cook, I’ll stay here!”,) he pushed the chair and sat.’ (Story_HareLion_#28)

As in (37), the ideophones in (43) are juxtaposed without a pause between them. In (44), the ideophone *físu* ‘pulling the hook (when catching fish)’ takes the instrumental adjunct *nao* ‘with it’ referring to the fishing pole mentioned in the preceding clause. Again, the adjunct precedes the ideophone. This order is not rigid though. In (45), for instance, the adjunct *na manyadzo* ‘with shame’ follows the ideophonic predicate *tsuri-tsuri*.

(44) *iye akamedza, pidamaŋgeye nyama mbafisura ŋtete wace, nao físu!*

iye

a-ka-medza

pi-da-maŋga = eye

PRO3SG SP1-PST.IPFV-fish

AGRP8-PFV.REL-catch = PRO1

9.fish

mba-fisura

n̩-tete

o-ace

nao

físu

CVB.SP1-pull.hook

3-fishing.pole AGRP3-POSS3SG

with.PRO3SG

IDEO(pulling hook)

‘He was fishing. When he caught a fish, he pulled his fishing pole, he pulled the hook with it.’ (Elicitation)

(45) *ntsikana, tsuri-tsuri na manyadzo, nde munaronga iye...*

n̩-tsikana

tsuri-tsuri

na

ma-nyadzo

1-girl

IDEO(looking down shamefully)

with

6-shame

nde mu-na-roŋga

iye

COP

AGRP18-PRS-speak.REL PRO3SG

‘The girl, looking down with shame, it is then she said...’

(Poem_Pakubvundzira)

Ideophonic predicates may be part of complex sentences where they function as the main (verbless) clause embedding a subordinate clause. In (46), the ideophone *odzí-odzí-odzí-odzí*, conveying the concept of walking feebly, without strength, functions as the main (verbless) clause introduced by the adverbial subordinate clause of condition/time *aŋgafamba* ‘if/when she walks.’ In (47), triplicated *bwekúbweku* ‘gabbling, making a lot of noise’ is introduced by the locative relative clause *panakʰaraco* ‘where she is.’ In (48), *pʰé*:: acts as the predicate of *iye kʰoŋgo* ‘he the
impostor.’ Together, they form the main clause in which the temporal relative clause *pidafika iye* ‘when he arrives’ is embedded.

(46) *iye kaŋkitikiti, aŋgafamba odzí-odzí-odzí-odzí*

[iye ka-η-kiti-kiti]_{INDPDT} [a-ŋga-famba]_{SUB}

PRO3SG 12(DIM)-1-small-RED SP1-SIT-walk

[odzí-odzí-odzí-odzí]_{MAIN}

IDEO(walking/moving feebly, without strength)-RED

‘She is very small. When she walks, she walks feebly, without strength.’
(Conv.06_#177)

(47) *ciŋkazi cire ciŋgabwera cisabweka maningi, panakʰaraco bwekúbweku-bwekúbweku-bwekúbweku*

[ci-ŋ-kazi cire [ci-ŋga-bwera]_{SUB} ci-sa-bweka maningi]_{MAIN}

7(DIM)-1-woman 7.DEM.III SP7-SIT-come SP7-HAB-gabble much

[pa-na-kʰara = co]_{SUB} [bwekúbweku-bwekúbweku-bwekúbweku]_{MAIN}

AGRP16-PRS-be.REL = PRO7 IDEO(gabbling)-RED

‘That woman, when she comes, she talks a lot of nonsense. Where she is, she makes a lot of noise.’ (Elicitation)

(48) *iye kʰoŋgo pidafika iye pʰé:: amona zá “nduyo porra azipʰura”*

[iye kʰoŋgo [pi-da-fika iye]_{SUB} pʰé::]_{MAIN}

PRO3SG 1a.impostor AGRP8-PFV.REL-arrive PRO3SG IDEO(observing, spying)

[a-mu-ona zá]_{INDPDT} ndi-uyo porra a-zi-pʰura

SP1.PFV-OP1-see there COP-3SG damn! SP1-OP10-remove.from.fire

‘The impostor, when he arrived, observed/spied, and he saw him (the turtle):
“This is him, damn, he removed them from the fire!”’ (Story_HareTurtle_#49)

Following subordinate clauses, *odzí-odzí-odzí-odzí, bwekébweku* and *pʰé::* express on their own an event which would otherwise be expressed by means of a main verbal clause. Their presence is syntactically required in the sentence.

In rare cases, ideophonic predicates do not seem to induce any argument structure, not even agent. In (49), for instance, the ideophone *cúbwi* ‘splashing sound’ appears at the sentence margin following the description of the bean falling into a well. It
impostor.’ Together, they form the main clause in which the temporal relative clause *pidafika iye* ‘when he arrives’ is embedded.

(46) *iye kaŋkitikiti, aŋgafamba odzí-odzí-odzí-odzí*

[iye ka-η-kiti-kiti]_{INDPDT} [a-ŋga-famba]_{SUB}

PRO3SG 12(DIM)-1-small-RED SP1-SIT-walk

[odzí-odzí-odzí-odzí]_{MAIN}

IDEO(walking/moving feebly, without strength)-RED

‘She is very small. When she walks, she walks feebly, without strength.’
(Conv.06_#177)

(47) *ciŋkazi cire ciŋgabwera cisabweka maniŋgi, panakʰaraco bwekúbweku-bwekúbweku-bwekúbweku*

[ci-ŋ-kazi cire [ci-ŋga-bwera]_{SUB} ci-sa-bweka maniŋgi]_{MAIN}

7(DIM)-1-woman 7.DEM.III SP7-SIT-come SP7-HAB-gabble much

[pa-na-kʰara = co]_{SUB} [bwekúbweku-bwekúbweku-bwekúbweku]_{MAIN}

AGRP16-PRS-be.REL = PRO7 IDEO(gabbling)-RED

‘That woman, when she comes, she talks a lot of nonsense. Where she is, she makes a lot of noise.’ (Elicitation)

(48) *iye kʰoŋgo pidafika iye pʰé:: amona zá “nduyo porra azipʰura”*

[iye kʰoŋgo [pi-da-fika iye]_{SUB} pʰé::]_{MAIN}

PRO3SG 1a.impostor AGRP8-PFV.REL-arrive PRO3SG IDEO(observing, spying)

[a-mu-ona zá]_{INDPDT} ndi-uyo porra a-zi-pʰura

SP1.PFV-OP1-see there COP-3SG damn! SP1-OP10-remove.from.fire

‘The impostor, when he arrived, observed/spied, and he saw him (the turtle):
“This is him, damn, he removed them from the fire!”’ (Story_HareTurtle_#49)

Following subordinate clauses, *odzí-odzí-odzí-odzí, bwekébweku* and *pʰé::* express on their own an event which would otherwise be expressed by means of a main verbal clause. Their presence is syntactically required in the sentence.

In rare cases, ideophonic predicates do not seem to induce any argument structure, not even agent. In (49), for instance, the ideophone *cúbwi* ‘splashing sound’ appears at the sentence margin following the description of the bean falling into a well. It
appears as a fully autonomous and argument-less predicate (also see example (51b)
below for another illustration).

(49) nyimo ire yapʰunyuzika ŋkʰugwa muṇcera mure | cúbwi!

[nyimo ire ya-pʰunyuzika]MAIN [ŋkʰu-gwa mu-ŋ-cera mure]SUB
9 bean 9.DEM.III SP9.PFV-slip COP15-fall 18-3-well 3.DEM.III

[cúbwi]INDPDT

IDEO(splash)

‘That bean slipped, fell into that well, splash!’ (Story_HareTurtle_#108)

**6.4 Summary**

Ideophones do not seem to display strong syntagmatic restrictions. They can all co-
express and/or specify the event expressed by a verb, or form complex predicates with
copulas and light verbs. They can also all be used holophrastically or predicatively:
no restrictions seem to apply, at least as far as the possibility of integrating subject
arguments is concerned. The possible presence of object arguments, in turn, is
conditioned by the lexical properties of ideophones. Examples (50)-(51) illustrate
multiple syntagmatic uses of ideophones in Sena. In (50), the ideophone oyó-oyo
'speaking simultaneously', repeated twice, can be used predicatively following the
copula verb ri, or the light verb cita. There is no difference in meaning between the
two constructions.

(50) ndagumana antʰu ari/akucita oyó-oyo oyó-oyo

nda-gumana a-ntʰu a-ri / a-ku-cita oyó-oyo-oyó-oyo
SP1SG.PFV-meet 2-people SP2-be SP2-PROG-do IDEO(speaking
simultaneously)-RED

‘I met people talking all at the same time.’ (Elicitation)

In (51), the ideophone *bzwó* ‘dawning’ is used twice. In (51a), it is the complement of the light verb *cita* ‘do’ inflected for the first person singular, which marks the speaker as the agent of the event ‘waking up’. In (51b), *bzwó* is used holophrastically to refer to the time of daybreak.
appears as a fully autonomous and argument-less predicate (also see example (51b)
below for another illustration).

(49) nyimo ire yapʰunyuzika ŋkʰugwa muṇcera mure | cúbwi!

[nyimo ire ya-pʰunyuzika]MAIN [ŋkʰu-gwa mu-ŋ-cera mure]SUB
9 bean 9.DEM.III SP9.PFV-slip COP15-fall 18-3-well 3.DEM.III

[cúbwi]INDPDT

IDEO(splash)

‘That bean slipped, fell into that well, splash!’ (Story_HareTurtle_#108)

**6.4 Summary**

Ideophones do not seem to display strong syntagmatic restrictions. They can all co-
express and/or specify the event expressed by a verb, or form complex predicates with
copulas and light verbs. They can also all be used holophrastically or predicatively:
no restrictions seem to apply, at least as far as the possibility of integrating subject
arguments is concerned. The possible presence of object arguments, in turn, is
conditioned by the lexical properties of ideophones. Examples (50)-(51) illustrate
multiple syntagmatic uses of ideophones in Sena. In (50), the ideophone oyó-oyo
'speaking simultaneously', repeated twice, can be used predicatively following the
copula verb ri, or the light verb cita. There is no difference in meaning between the
two constructions.

(50) ndagumana antʰu ari/akucita oyó-oyo oyó-oyo

nda-gumana a-ntʰu a-ri / a-ku-cita oyó-oyo-oyó-oyo
SP1SG.PFV-meet 2-people SP2-be SP2-PROG-do IDEO(speaking
simultaneously)-RED

‘I met people talking all at the same time.’ (Elicitation)

In (51), the ideophone *bzwó* ‘dawning’ is used twice. In (51a), it is the complement of the light verb *cita* ‘do’ inflected for the first person singular, which marks the speaker as the agent of the event ‘waking up’. In (51b), *bzwó* is used holophrastically to refer to the time of daybreak.
(51) *ndingacita bzwó kunendene ṅkwenderatu, bzwó kunendene ṅkwenderatu*

a. **ndi-ŋga-cita** **bzwó** ku-na-enda = ine ndi-kwendera = tu
SP1SG-SIT-do IDEO(dawning) AGRP17-PRS-go.REL = PRO1SG SP1SG-go.to = EMPH
‘When I wake up, wherever I go, I do go.’ (LifeStory_CeTh_#69)

b. **bzwó** ku-na-enda = ine ndi-kwendera = tu
IDEO(dawning) AGRP17-PRS-go.REL = PRO1SG SP1SG-go.to = EMPH
‘At dawn, wherever I go, I do go.’ (LifeStory_CeTh_#70)

## 7. Semantic aspects

This section is devoted to the semantic aspects of ideophones, addressing their general meanings (§7.1), the question of iconicity (§7.2), and the existence of idioms with ideophones and body parts (§7.3).

### 7.1 General meanings

Ideophones in Sena cover a large array of meanings that cover the five major semantic fields hierarchically identified by Dingemanse (2012: 663) along an implicational hierarchy as follows: Sound > Movement > Visual pattern > Other sensory percepts > Inner feelings and cognitive states. This hierarchy makes predictions about the existence of members in each field: if a language has ideophones expressing movement, then it also has ideophones for sound, etc. These five semantic categories are very broad and could easily be split into various sub-fields. Sound evokes any sensation perceived by the sense of hearing, and includes onomatopoeic sounds such as animal voices, wind blowing, etc. Movement illustrates an act or process of moving, any physical behavior which implies a change of place or position or posture, or a particular instance or manner of moving. Visual patterns cover a range of physical properties such as color, form, dimension, aspect, state, etc. The other category of sensory perception involves tactile, gustatory, and olfactory sensory domains. Examples of each category are listed in (52). Attention has been given to provide examples uncited so far.

(52) a. Sound

<table><tr><td>jigú-jigú</td><td>'sound of drawing water at the pump'</td></tr><tr><td>gegebede</td><td>'noisy sound of something falling'</td></tr><tr><td>gwidyó</td><td>'sound while eating or swallowing'</td></tr></table>
(51) *ndingacita bzwó kunendene ṅkwenderatu, bzwó kunendene ṅkwenderatu*

a. **ndi-ŋga-cita** **bzwó** ku-na-enda = ine ndi-kwendera = tu
SP1SG-SIT-do IDEO(dawning) AGRP17-PRS-go.REL = PRO1SG SP1SG-go.to = EMPH
‘When I wake up, wherever I go, I do go.’ (LifeStory_CeTh_#69)

b. **bzwó** ku-na-enda = ine ndi-kwendera = tu
IDEO(dawning) AGRP17-PRS-go.REL = PRO1SG SP1SG-go.to = EMPH
‘At dawn, wherever I go, I do go.’ (LifeStory_CeTh_#70)

## 7. Semantic aspects

This section is devoted to the semantic aspects of ideophones, addressing their general meanings (§7.1), the question of iconicity (§7.2), and the existence of idioms with ideophones and body parts (§7.3).

### 7.1 General meanings

Ideophones in Sena cover a large array of meanings that cover the five major semantic fields hierarchically identified by Dingemanse (2012: 663) along an implicational hierarchy as follows: Sound > Movement > Visual pattern > Other sensory percepts > Inner feelings and cognitive states. This hierarchy makes predictions about the existence of members in each field: if a language has ideophones expressing movement, then it also has ideophones for sound, etc. These five semantic categories are very broad and could easily be split into various sub-fields. Sound evokes any sensation perceived by the sense of hearing, and includes onomatopoeic sounds such as animal voices, wind blowing, etc. Movement illustrates an act or process of moving, any physical behavior which implies a change of place or position or posture, or a particular instance or manner of moving. Visual patterns cover a range of physical properties such as color, form, dimension, aspect, state, etc. The other category of sensory perception involves tactile, gustatory, and olfactory sensory domains. Examples of each category are listed in (52). Attention has been given to provide examples uncited so far.

(52) a. Sound

<table><tr><td>jigú-jigú</td><td>‘sound of drawing water at the pump’</td></tr><tr><td>gegebede</td><td>‘noisy sound of something falling’</td></tr><tr><td>gwidyó</td><td>‘sound while eating or swallowing’</td></tr></table>
b. Movement

jidú-jidu ‘dancing in circles’

cʰó-cʰó-cʰó ‘jumping on one leg’

n- n'chú-n'chú ‘hunkering down’

c. Visual pattern

doríró: ‘being clean and transparent (water)’

dzá: ‘being very tall, giant’

bití-biti ‘shining, glittering (skin, wood)’

d. Other sensory perceptions

jé: ‘spicy (food or drink)’

gú: ‘taste of sour food’

rebvú-rebvu ‘(too) sweet’

kʰámwa ‘wet’

nyanvúrú-vuru ‘getting goose bumps’

e. Inner feelings and cognitive states

dodoméké ‘being doubtful’

dúmé: ‘being afraid, with fear’

nóni ‘alone, lonely’

nyandú-nyandu ‘madly agitated’

Each of the semantic fields represented in (52) contains a large inventory of ideophones.

Deverbal ideophones usually display a one-to-one correspondence with the semantics of the verbs they are derived from. This explains why my main consultant was able to assign a specific meaning to many ideophones found in Prieto (2015) outside of their context. Postulating that the meaning of an ideophone depends on the context and is highly influenced by socio-pragmatic factors (Moshi 1993) is thus not entirely correct in Sena. Other ideophones do not have a clear connection to members of other word classes. Ideophones of onomatopoeic origin are proportionally very few in Sena, defying Doke’s (1935: 118) famous statement on the onomatopoetic properties of ideophones.<fnref n="8" />

A few ideophones are polysemous, as can be seen in (53).

<footnote n="8">⁸ In Doke’s (1935: 118), an ideophone is “a vivid representation of an idea in sound. A word, often onomatopoeic, which describes a predicate, qualificative or adverb in respect to manner, color, smell, action, state or intensity.”</footnote>
b. Movement

jidú-jidu ‘dancing in circles’

cʰó-cʰó-cʰó ‘jumping on one leg’

n- n'chú- n'chú ‘hunkering down’

c. Visual pattern

doríró: ‘being clean and transparent (water)’

dzá: ‘being very tall, giant’

bití-biti ‘shining, glittering (skin, wood)’

d. Other sensory perceptions

jé: ‘spicy (food or drink)’

gú: ‘taste of sour food’

rebvú-rebvu ‘(too) sweet’

kʰámwa ‘wet’

nyanvúrú-vuru ‘getting goose bumps’

e. Inner feelings and cognitive states

dodoméké ‘being doubtful’

dúmé: ‘being afraid, with fear’

nóni ‘alone, lonely’

nyandú-nyandu ‘madly agitated’

Each of the semantic fields represented in (52) contains a large inventory of ideophones.

Deverbal ideophones usually display a one-to-one correspondence with the semantics of the verbs they are derived from. This explains why my main consultant was able to assign a specific meaning to many ideophones found in Prieto (2015) outside of their context. Postulating that the meaning of an ideophone depends on the context and is highly influenced by socio-pragmatic factors (Moshi 1993) is thus not entirely correct in Sena. Other ideophones do not have a clear connection to members of other word classes. Ideophones of onomatopoeic origin are proportionally very few in Sena, defying Doke's (1935: 118) famous statement on the onomatopoetic properties of ideophones.<fnref n="8" />

A few ideophones are polysemous, as can be seen in (53).

<footnote n="8">⁸ In Doke's (1935: 118), an ideophone is “a vivid representation of an idea in sound. A word, often onomatopoeic, which describes a predicate, qualificative or adverb in respect to manner, color, smell, action, state or intensity.”</footnote>
<table><tr><td>(53) dúr::</td><td>i) 'silent with fear (in front of chiefs)'<br/>ii) 'fading away (for plant)'</td></tr><tr><td>pʰurúr::</td><td>i) 'unrolling mat'<br/>ii) 'trying to fly away, for trapped bird'</td></tr><tr><td>timbwí-timbwi</td><td>i) 'with tightened belt'<br/>ii) 'suffering because of someone'</td></tr><tr><td>pʰá-pʰá-pʰá</td><td>i) 'move and sound of bird landing'<br/>ii) 'when crop starts growing and fields get green'</td></tr></table>

## 7.2 Iconicity in ideophones

In this subsection, I examine how certain phonological properties of ideophones (particularly deverbal ideophones) may correlate with the manner in which an action is performed. The shape of many deverbal ideophones follows two complementary patterns ruled by phono-semantic principles. The first pattern involves vowel lengthening, resulting in CV:(::) or CV:(::)CV shapes. Consonant lengthening is also attested, albeit rarer and restricted to the trill /r/ (see Table 6). The prolongation of a sound is an expressive means of describing a single, durative and usually intense event which may be extended in space or time. The ideophone fó:: (< kufota 'to fart silently') expresses a single occurrence of the act of farting silently. The second pattern relies on reduplication, triplication and further repetition of an ideophonic basis, with the semantic effect of expressing a recurrent, repetitive or even rhythmic event. Onomatopoeic ideophones such as wú-wu-wú 'sound of dog barking' or mé-mé: 'sound of goat bleating' are vivid examples. More examples are provided in (54), in which ideophones are paired according to these two phono-semantic principles. Notably, the triplication and even further repetition of monosyllabic ideophones, as pé-pé-pé in (54a) and tʰé-tʰé-tʰé in (54b), generally applies to events made up of small actions (here short sounds) which repeat over and over.

<table><tr><td>(54) a. pé::</td><td>'sound of a long and continuous breath/blow'</td></tr><tr><td>pé-pé-pé</td><td>'sound of a repetitive gesture which involves air movement, such as waving a fan'</td></tr><tr><td>b. tʰé::</td><td>'sound of soft and continuous wind blowing'</td></tr><tr><td>tʰé-tʰé-tʰé</td><td>'sound of soft wind blowing repetitively'</td></tr><tr><td>c. nyá::ŋgu</td><td>'licking'</td></tr><tr><td>nyangú-nyangú</td><td>'licking repeatedly'</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>(53) dúr::</td><td>i) 'silent with fear (in front of chiefs)'<br/>ii) 'fading away (for plant)'</td></tr><tr><td>pʰurúr::</td><td>i) 'unrolling mat'<br/>ii) 'trying to fly away, for trapped bird'</td></tr><tr><td>timbwí-timbwi</td><td>i) 'with tightened belt'<br/>ii) 'suffering because of someone'</td></tr><tr><td>pʰá-pʰá-pʰá</td><td>i) 'move and sound of bird landing'<br/>ii) 'when crop starts growing and fields get green'</td></tr></table>

## 7.2 Iconicity in ideophones

In this subsection, I examine how certain phonological properties of ideophones (particularly deverbal ideophones) may correlate with the manner in which an action is performed. The shape of many deverbal ideophones follows two complementary patterns ruled by phono-semantic principles. The first pattern involves vowel lengthening, resulting in CV:(::) or CV:(::)CV shapes. Consonant lengthening is also attested, albeit rarer and restricted to the trill /r/ (see Table 6). The prolongation of a sound is an expressive means of describing a single, durative and usually intense event which may be extended in space or time. The ideophone fó:: (< kufota 'to fart silently') expresses a single occurrence of the act of farting silently. The second pattern relies on reduplication, triplication and further repetition of an ideophonic basis, with the semantic effect of expressing a recurrent, repetitive or even rhythmic event. Onomatopoeic ideophones such as wú-wu-wú 'sound of dog barking' or mé-mé: 'sound of goat bleating' are vivid examples. More examples are provided in (54), in which ideophones are paired according to these two phono-semantic principles. Notably, the triplication and even further repetition of monosyllabic ideophones, as pé-pé-pé in (54a) and tʰé-tʰé-tʰé in (54b), generally applies to events made up of small actions (here short sounds) which repeat over and over.

<table><tr><td>(54) a. pé::</td><td>'sound of a long and continuous breath/blow'</td></tr><tr><td>pé-pé-pé</td><td>'sound of a repetitive gesture which involves air movement, such as waving a fan'</td></tr><tr><td>b. tʰé::</td><td>'sound of soft and continuous wind blowing'</td></tr><tr><td>tʰé-tʰé-tʰé</td><td>'sound of soft wind blowing repetitively'</td></tr><tr><td>c. nyá::ŋgu</td><td>'licking'</td></tr><tr><td>nyangú-nyangú</td><td>'licking repeatedly'</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>d. pʰurúr̥::</td><td>'trying to fly away (for trapped bird)'</td></tr><tr><td>pʰurú-pʰuru</td><td>'trying repeatedly to fly away (for trapped bird)'</td></tr></table>

In (55)-(56), ideophones derived from the verb stem *godoma* ‘kneel’ are illustrated. In (55), *gónda* follows the copula verb and the event described, a woman on her knees, is static and durative. In (56), the reduplicated *godá-goda* supports the repetitive and rhythmic motion implied in the verb *kufamba* ‘to walk’.

(55) *maye ure taŋgumana, ari gónda*

maye ure ta-ŋ-gumana a-ri *gónda*

1.mother 1.DEM.III SP1PL.PFV-OP1-meet SP1-be IDEO(kneeling)

‘That mother, we met her (she is) kneeling.’ (Elicitation)

(56) *kufamba godá-goda*

ku-famba godá-goda

INF-walk IDEO(kneeling)-RED

‘To walk on the knees.’ (Elicitation)

These phono-semantic principles, according to which the shape of ideophones mirrors the physical characteristics of the actions they refer to, are in fact strongly linked to the so-called “diagrammatic iconicity” (Downing & Stiebels 2012), which establishes visual resemblance between the form of the sign or linguistic expression and its meaning.

In terms of sound symbolism, only a few (possible) correspondences between sound and meaning could be detected. The most promising example is the (aspirated) voiceless bilabial stop /pʰ/), which is associated with air movement in at least three onomatopoeias: *pé*:: ‘sound of a long and continuous breath/blow’, *pé-pé-pé* ‘sound of a repetitive gesture which involves air movement, such as waving a fan’, and *pʰá-pʰá-pʰá* ‘move and sound of bird landing’. The use of the aspirated voiceless velar stop /kʰ/ in *kʰosó-kʰoso* ‘sound of coughing a lot’ evokes abrupt vocalization. The aspirated voiceless alveolar stop /tʰ/ at the beginning of onomatopoeias correlates with a soft or quiet sound, e.g. *tʰó-tʰó-tʰó* ‘sound of drops of water dripping’, *tʰé-tʰé-tʰé* / *tʰé*:: ‘sound of soft wind blowing repetitively/once’, and *tʰúkutu* ‘landing gently’. These examples are too few, however, to speak of honestemes, and there is plenty of data that counters the above suggestions.
<table><tr><td>d. pʰurúr̥::</td><td>'trying to fly away (for trapped bird)'</td></tr><tr><td>pʰurú-pʰuru</td><td>'trying repeatedly to fly away (for trapped bird)'</td></tr></table>

In (55)-(56), ideophones derived from the verb stem *godoma* ‘kneel’ are illustrated. In (55), *gónda* follows the copula verb and the event described, a woman on her knees, is static and durative. In (56), the reduplicated *godá-goda* supports the repetitive and rhythmic motion implied in the verb *kufamba* ‘to walk’.

(55) maye ure taŋgumana, ari góndá
maye ure ta-ŋ-gumana a-ri góndá
1.mother 1.DEM.III SP1PL.PFV-OP1-meet SP1-be IDEO(kneeling)
‘That mother, we met her (she is) kneeling.’ (Elicitation)

(56) kufamba godá-goda
ku-famba godá-goda
INF-walk IDEO(kneeling)-RED
‘To walk on the knees.’ (Elicitation)

These phono-semantic principles, according to which the shape of ideophones mirrors the physical characteristics of the actions they refer to, are in fact strongly linked to the so-called “diagrammatic iconicity” (Downing & Stiebels 2012), which establishes visual resemblance between the form of the sign or linguistic expression and its meaning.

In terms of sound symbolism, only a few (possible) correspondences between sound and meaning could be detected. The most promising example is the (aspirated) voiceless bilabial stop /pʰ/), which is associated with air movement in at least three onomatopoeias: pé:: ‘sound of a long and continuous breath/blow’, pé-pé-pé ‘sound of a repetitive gesture which involves air movement, such as waving a fan’, and pʰá-pʰá-pʰá ‘move and sound of bird landing’. The use of the aspirated voiceless velar stop /kʰ/ in kʰosó-kʰoso ‘sound of coughing a lot’ evokes abrupt vocalization. The aspirated voiceless alveolar stop /tʰ/ at the beginning of onomatopoeias correlates with a soft or quiet sound, e.g. tʰó-tʰó-tʰó ‘sound of drops of water dripping’, tʰé-tʰé-tʰé / tʰé:: ‘sound of soft wind blowing repetitively/once’, and tʰúkutu ‘landing gently’. These examples are too few, however, to speak of honestemes, and there is plenty of data that counters the above suggestions.
As for vowels, they do not seem to be affected by sound symbolism. No direct meaning may easily be associated to a vocalic sound. Furthermore, the process whereby vocalic variation triggers variation in meaning does not exist in Sena ideophones. This is illustrated in the minimal pairs in (57) based on vowel substitution. No systematic sound-meaning correspondences have been detected for vowels. The pairs of ideophones in (57) differ only in the quality of their vowels, and although a semantic connection might be detected, namely different sound types in (57a), alignment in (57b), and loss of order in (57c), the choice of vowels in each pair seems arbitrary.

<table><tr><td>(57) a. <b>dré-dré</b></td><td>'sound of fart'</td></tr><tr><td><b>dró-dró</b></td><td>'sound of jumps made by medium-sized animals (e.g. goat)'</td></tr><tr><td>b. <b>derú-derú</b></td><td>'balancing'</td></tr><tr><td><b>durú-duru</b></td><td>'in a line or in a group (people walking)'</td></tr><tr><td>c. <b>dzedzé-dzedzé</b></td><td>'losing balance, staggering'</td></tr><tr><td><b>dzudzú-dzudzú</b></td><td>'causing confusion'</td></tr></table>

## 7.3 Ideophone-body part collocations

Several ideophones in Sena combine with body part nouns. Two body parts are particularly conducive to attracting ideophones, i.e. *maso* 'eyes' (58) and *ntima* 'heart' (59).

### (58) maso 'eyes' + ideophone

<table><tr><td>maso goma-goma</td><td>'with a look of pain'</td></tr><tr><td>maso gudu-gudu</td><td>'with closed or heavy eyes (because of drowsiness)'</td></tr><tr><td>maso muni-muni</td><td>'with half-closed eyes'</td></tr><tr><td>maso tʰubu-tʰubu</td><td>'with swollen eyes'</td></tr><tr><td>maso cetú-cetu</td><td>'with threatening eyes' or 'with bright eyes'</td></tr><tr><td>maso mbú:z</td><td>'with staring eyes'</td></tr><tr><td>maso rwá-rwá</td><td>'with eyes wide open, without blinking'</td></tr></table>

### (59) ntima 'heart' + ideophone

<table><tr><td>ntima bakú-bakú</td><td>'with heart beating'</td></tr><tr><td>ntima parú-paru</td><td>'with heart beating in fear'</td></tr><tr><td>ntima bii</td><td>'with fearful heart, with apprehension'</td></tr></table>
As for vowels, they do not seem to be affected by sound symbolism. No direct meaning may easily be associated to a vocalic sound. Furthermore, the process whereby vocalic variation triggers variation in meaning does not exist in Sena ideophones. This is illustrated in the minimal pairs in (57) based on vowel substitution. No systematic sound-meaning correspondences have been detected for vowels. The pairs of ideophones in (57) differ only in the quality of their vowels, and although a semantic connection might be detected, namely different sound types in (57a), alignment in (57b), and loss of order in (57c), the choice of vowels in each pair seems arbitrary.

<table><tr><td>(57) a. <b>dré-dré</b></td><td>'sound of fart'</td></tr><tr><td><b>dró-dró</b></td><td>'sound of jumps made by medium-sized animals (e.g. goat)'</td></tr><tr><td>b. <b>derú-derú</b></td><td>'balancing'</td></tr><tr><td><b>durú-duru</b></td><td>'in a line or in a group (people walking)'</td></tr><tr><td>c. <b>dzedzé-dzedzé</b></td><td>'losing balance, staggering'</td></tr><tr><td><b>dzudzú-dzudzú</b></td><td>'causing confusion'</td></tr></table>

## 7.3 Ideophone-body part collocations

Several ideophones in Sena combine with body part nouns. Two body parts are particularly conducive to attracting ideophones, i.e. *maso* 'eyes' (58) and *ntima* 'heart' (59).

### (58) maso 'eyes' + ideophone

<table><tr><td>maso goma-goma</td><td>'with a look of pain'</td></tr><tr><td>maso gudu-gudu</td><td>'with closed or heavy eyes (because of drowsiness)'</td></tr><tr><td>maso muni-muni</td><td>'with half-closed eyes'</td></tr><tr><td>maso tʰubu-tʰubu</td><td>'with swollen eyes'</td></tr><tr><td>maso cetú-cetu</td><td>'with threatening eyes' or 'with bright eyes'</td></tr><tr><td>maso mbú:></td><td>'with staring eyes'</td></tr><tr><td>maso rwá-rwá</td><td>'with eyes wide open, without blinking'</td></tr></table>

### (59) ntima 'heart' + ideophone

<table><tr><td>ntima bakú-bakú</td><td>'with heart beating'</td></tr><tr><td>ntima parú-paru</td><td>'with heart beating in fear'</td></tr><tr><td>ntima bii</td><td>'with fearful heart, with apprehension'</td></tr></table>
ntima gugú:du ‘with dry heart, with no empathy/compassion’

ntima répé-répé ‘with the desire to do or eat sth.’

ntima dyókó-dyoko ‘with the desire to eat sth.’

Often, the ideophone directly follows the body part noun (60), albeit a possessive modifier can easily be inserted between both elements (61).

(60) tangumana pakati mbakabvina maso rwá-rwá

ta-ŋ-gumana

pa-kati

mba-ka-bvina

ma-so

SP1PL.PFV-OP1-meet

16-within

CVB-PST.IPFV-dance

6-eye

rwá-rwá

IDEO(eyes wide open)

‘We found him here dancing, his eyes (are) wide open (in trance).’ (Elicitation)

(61) (wandipangiza mano ako, mano ako niŋa ukaka,)

maso ako cetú-cetu, kuyetima niŋa nyenyezi

ma-so ako

cetú-cetu

ku-yetima niŋa nyenyezi

6-eye

AGRP6.POSS2SG

IDEO(bright)

INF-shine like 10.star

‘(You showed me your teeth, your teeth like sesame seeds,) your eyes are bright, shining like stars.’ (Poem_Ndiri.Ncitulo)

Syntactically, ideophones that take body parts subjects can be predicates on their own (see §6.3), as in (60) and (61) above, or form a complex predicate with a copula (see §6.2), as in (62) below, which literally translates as ‘my heart was with the desire to eat something’.

(62) papaya pikayionene ntimaŋga ukʰari répé-répé funa kuyidya

papaya

pi-ka-yi-ona = ine

9.papaya

AGRP8-PST.IPFV-OP9-see.REL = PRO1SG

n-timaŋga

u-kʰa-ri

répé-répé

funa

3-heart.POSS1SG

SP3-PST.IPFV-be

IDEO(desire to eat sth.)

want

ku-yi-dya

INF-OP9-eat

‘The papaya, when I saw it, I felt the desire to eat it, I wanted to eat it.’ (Elicitation)

Two other body parts are found in idioms with ideophones, i.e. ŋkʰope ‘face’ (63) and mimba ‘belly, stomach’ (64), but these combinations are less productive. Further note
ntima gugú:du ‘with dry heart, with no empathy/compassion’

ntima répé-répé ‘with the desire to do or eat sth.’

ntima dyókó-dyoko ‘with the desire to eat sth.’

Often, the ideophone directly follows the body part noun (60), albeit a possessive modifier can easily be inserted between both elements (61).

(60) tangumana pakati mbakabvina maso rwá-rwá

ta-ŋ-gumana pa-kati mba-ka-bvina ma-so

SP1PL.PFV-OP1-meet 16-within CVB-PST.IPFV-dance 6-eye

rwá-rwá

IDEO(eyes wide open)

‘We found him here dancing, his eyes (are) wide open (in trance).’ (Elicitation)

(61) (wandipangiza mano ako, mano ako niŋa ukaka,)

maso ako cetú-cetu, kuyetima niŋa nyenyezi

ma-so ako cetú-cetu ku-yetima niŋa nyenyezi

6-eye AGRP6.POSS2SG IDEO(bright) INF-shine like 10.star

‘(You showed me your teeth, your teeth like sesame seeds,) your eyes are bright, shining like stars.’ (Poem_Ndiri.Ncitulo)

Syntactically, ideophones that take body parts subjects can be predicates on their own (see §6.3), as in (60) and (61) above, or form a complex predicate with a copula (see §6.2), as in (62) below, which literally translates as ‘my heart was with the desire to eat something’.

(62) papaya pikayionene ntimaŋga ukʰari répé-répé funa kuyidya

papaya pi-ka-yi-ona = ine

9.papaya AGRP8-PST.IPFV-OP9-see.REL = PRO1SG

n-timaŋga u-kʰa-ri répé-répé funa

3-heart.POSS1SG SP3-PST.IPFV-be IDEO(desire to eat sth.) want

ku-yi-dya

INF-OP9-eat

‘The papaya, when I saw it, I felt the desire to eat it, I wanted to eat it.’ (Elicitation)

Two other body parts are found in idioms with ideophones, i.e. ŋkʰope ‘face’ (63) and mimba ‘belly, stomach’ (64), but these combinations are less productive. Further note
that *yezi-yezi* ‘out of control like a drunk’ and *zígu:* ‘with sudden gesture shifting away from someone’ in (63) express movements or gestures which are not restricted to the face; they also naturally combine with the noun *manungo* ‘body’.

(63) ngkʰope ‘face’ + ideophone

<table><tr><td>ŋkʰope gada-gada</td><td>'with big and/or open face'</td></tr><tr><td>ŋkʰope nyasi-nyasi</td><td>'with upset face ready to cry'</td></tr><tr><td>ŋkʰope yárá-yárá</td><td>'with false joyful facial expression while feeling resentful'</td></tr><tr><td>ŋkʰope yézí-yézí</td><td>'out of control like a drunk'</td></tr><tr><td>ŋkʰope zígu:</td><td>'with sudden gesture shifting away from s.o.'</td></tr></table>

(64) mimba ‘belly, stomach’ + ideophone

<table><tr><td>mimba mba-mba-mba</td><td>'with full stomach'</td></tr><tr><td>mimba dé:fu</td><td>'with empty stomach'</td></tr><tr><td>mimba toro</td><td>'swelling of pregnant belly'</td></tr></table>

Example (65), extracted from naturalistic data, illustrates the use of *mimba toro* 'swelling of pregnant belly'.

(65) pakusemba mai uyu, mwana ne nensa di mimba toro, mwana fí:

<table><tr><td>pa-ku-semba mai uyu</td><td>mwana ne nensa di mimba</td></tr><tr><td>16-INF-marry 1.mother 1.DEM.I</td><td>1.child NEG be.difficult COP 9.belly</td></tr><tr><td><b>toro</b></td><td><b>mwana fí</b></td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>IDEO swelling of pregnant belly)</td><td>1.child IDEO (standing straight, well mounted)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">'When this woman got married, the child, it was not difficult to get pregnant, the child is now here standing.' (Conv.06_MaBeCe_#343)</td></tr></table>

## 8. Conclusion: Toward a definition of ideophones in Sena

From the features discussed above, we first conclude that Sena ideophones may assume functions or distributions typically conveyed by other word classes. They have the ability to behave like adverbs or converbs, both in terms of distribution (mostly sentence-final) and function (descriptive or manner adverbs). This is especially the case when they combine with verbs from which they are morphologically derived, resulting in constructions that literally translate as ‘cut cutting’. Together with copula verbs, ideophones form complex predicates, e.g. *ri bídɔ́:* ‘be dark, black’. In this environment, the syntactic behavior of ideophones shows more affinities with that of
that *yezi-yezi* ‘out of control like a drunk’ and *zígu:* ‘with sudden gesture shifting away from someone’ in (63) express movements or gestures which are not restricted to the face; they also naturally combine with the noun *manungo* ‘body’.

(63) ngkʰope ‘face’ + ideophone

<table><tr><td>ŋkʰope gada-gada</td><td>'with big and/or open face'</td></tr><tr><td>ŋkʰope nyasi-nyasi</td><td>'with upset face ready to cry'</td></tr><tr><td>ŋkʰope yárá-yárá</td><td>'with false joyful facial expression while feeling resentful'</td></tr><tr><td>ŋkʰope yézí-yézí</td><td>'out of control like a drunk'</td></tr><tr><td>ŋkʰope zígu:</td><td>'with sudden gesture shifting away from s.o.'</td></tr></table>

(64) mimba ‘belly, stomach’ + ideophone

<table><tr><td>mimba mba-mba-mba</td><td>'with full stomach'</td></tr><tr><td>mimba dé:fu</td><td>'with empty stomach'</td></tr><tr><td>mimba toro</td><td>'swelling of pregnant belly'</td></tr></table>

Example (65), extracted from naturalistic data, illustrates the use of *mimba toro* ‘swelling of pregnant belly’.

(65) pakusemba mai uyu, mwana ne nensa di mimba toro, mwana fí:

<table><tr><td>pa-ku-semba mai uyu</td><td>mwana ne nensa di mimba</td></tr><tr><td>16-INF-marry 1.mother 1.DEM.I</td><td>1.child NEG be.difficult COP 9.belly</td></tr><tr><td><b>toro</b></td><td><b>mwana fí</b></td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>IDEO swelling of pregnant belly)</td><td>1.child IDEO (standing straight, well mounted)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">'When this woman got married, the child, it was not difficult to get pregnant, the child is now here standing.' (Conv.06_MaBeCe_#343)</td></tr></table>

## 8. Conclusion: Toward a definition of ideophones in Sena

From the features discussed above, we first conclude that Sena ideophones may assume functions or distributions typically conveyed by other word classes. They have the ability to behave like adverbs or converbs, both in terms of distribution (mostly sentence-final) and function (descriptive or manner adverbs). This is especially the case when they combine with verbs from which they are morphologically derived, resulting in constructions that literally translate as ‘cut cutting’. Together with copula verbs, ideophones form complex predicates, e.g. *ri bídɔ́:* ‘be dark, black’. In this environment, the syntactic behavior of ideophones shows more affinities with that of
nouns and adjectives, although ideophones do not share the morphological properties displayed in nouns and adjectives. In other syntactic environments, ideophones are used predicatively on their own, that is they substitute the verb and take thematic arguments. Unlike normal verb forms though, ideophonic predicates do not require concordial agreement with the nominals with which they pattern. Nor do they contain any type of inflectional or derivational morphology. Finally, they behave like interjections in the sense that they both express emotions, are easily lengthened or repeated with a characteristic prosodic pattern, and overall, they are phonologically and syntactically less constrained than other word classes. However, what clearly distinguishes ideophones from interjections is the capacity of the former to participate in the clause construction and have arguments.

What makes a lexeme an ideophone in Sena? Among the different word classes in the language, ideophones are distinctive in their phonology, their morphology, and above all their syntax. First, vowel (and more rarely consonant) length — in a system where long vowels are non-phonemic — is a defining property of Sena ideophones. Second, only the category of ideophones contains elements with closed syllables. Third, in a prosodic system marked by predictable stress, ideophones exhibit tone patterns. Morphologically, unlike most lexical word classes, including nouns, adjectives, verbs and adverbs, ideophones have no (or very little) morphology. The high frequency at which reduplication is applied in ideophones is also not seen in other word classes, except adverbs in *ci-* (§2). Triplication and multiplication, commonly found in ideophones, are not attested elsewhere, with the exception of interjections. Syntactically, ideophones can display a variety of functions, as explained in the preceding paragraph, but a crucial aspect of their syntactic behavior which distinguishes them from all other word classes - except interjections - is their capacity to be used independently and holophrastically.

In light of the above elements, Sena ideophones can be deemed as a distinct word class in the language on a par with nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, etc. This is in line with the analyses usually adopted by Bantuist scholars, starting with Doke (1954) for Southern Bantu languages.

## Acknowledgements

This research has been carried out as part of my participation in the research group *Ideophones and interjections in a typological, areal and diachronic perspective* led by
nouns and adjectives, although ideophones do not share the morphological properties displayed in nouns and adjectives. In other syntactic environments, ideophones are used predicatively on their own, that is they substitute the verb and take thematic arguments. Unlike normal verb forms though, ideophonic predicates do not require concordial agreement with the nominals with which they pattern. Nor do they contain any type of inflectional or derivational morphology. Finally, they behave like interjections in the sense that they both express emotions, are easily lengthened or repeated with a characteristic prosodic pattern, and overall, they are phonologically and syntactically less constrained than other word classes. However, what clearly distinguishes ideophones from interjections is the capacity of the former to participate in the clause construction and have arguments.

What makes a lexeme an ideophone in Sena? Among the different word classes in the language, ideophones are distinctive in their phonology, their morphology, and above all their syntax. First, vowel (and more rarely consonant) length — in a system where long vowels are non-phonemic — is a defining property of Sena ideophones. Second, only the category of ideophones contains elements with closed syllables. Third, in a prosodic system marked by predictable stress, ideophones exhibit tone patterns. Morphologically, unlike most lexical word classes, including nouns, adjectives, verbs and adverbs, ideophones have no (or very little) morphology. The high frequency at which reduplication is applied in ideophones is also not seen in other word classes, except adverbs in *ci-* (§2). Triplication and multiplication, commonly found in ideophones, are not attested elsewhere, with the exception of interjections. Syntactically, ideophones can display a variety of functions, as explained in the preceding paragraph, but a crucial aspect of their syntactic behavior which distinguishes them from all other word classes - except interjections - is their capacity to be used independently and holophrastically.

In light of the above elements, Sena ideophones can be deemed as a distinct word class in the language on a par with nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, etc. This is in line with the analyses usually adopted by Bantuist scholars, starting with Doke (1954) for Southern Bantu languages.

## Acknowledgements

This research has been carried out as part of my participation in the research group *Ideophones and interjections in a typological, areal and diachronic perspective* led by
Aimée Lahaussois and Yvonne Treis (LabEx *Empirical Foundations of Linguistics*, ANR-10-LABX-0083), who are gratefully acknowledged. I also wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers as well as Yvonne Treis and Aimée Lahaussois for their very helpful and constructive comments on an earlier version of this chapter. Parts of the research presented herein were supported by grants from the CNRS InSHS ("Soutien à la Mobilité Internationale" program) and the IFAS (French Institute of South Africa) for fieldwork data collection. I take this opportunity to warmly thank my Sena language consultants for their help and patience.

## Abbreviations

1, 2, 3... = noun class
1SG/PL, 2SG/PL =
grammatical persons
.I, .II, .III = demonstrative
series (.I 'proximal', .II
'medial', .III 'distal')
AGRP = agreement prefix
AM = associated motion
APPL = applicative
COM = comitative
CONN = connective
COP = copula
CVB = converb
DEM = demonstrative
DIM = diminutive
EMPH = emphatic

FV = final vowel
HAB = habitual
IDEO = ideophone
INF = infinitive
INT = intensive
INTERJ = interjection
IPFV = imperfective
ITV = itive
NARR = narrative
NEG = negation
NTR = neuter
OP = object prefix
PASS = passive
PFV = perfective
PLA = plural addressee
POSS = possessive

PRO = pronoun
PROG = progressive
PRS = present
PST = past
REL = relative
RED = reduplication
SEQ = sequential
SG = singular
SIT = situative
SP = subject prefix
VOC = vocative
VTV = ventive

## References

Akita, Kimi & Prashant Pardeshi (eds.). 2019. *Ideophones, mimetics and expressives*. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Alves, Albano Padre. 1939. *Noções gramaticais da língua chisena*. Braga: Missões Fransiscanas.

Ameka, Felix K. 2001. Ideophones and the nature of the adjective word class in Ewe. In F. K. Erhard Voeltz & Christa Kilian-Hatz (eds.), *Ideophones*, 25–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Aimée Lahaussois and Yvonne Treis (LabEx *Empirical Foundations of Linguistics*, ANR-10-LABX-0083), who are gratefully acknowledged. I also wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers as well as Yvonne Treis and Aimée Lahaussois for their very helpful and constructive comments on an earlier version of this chapter. Parts of the research presented herein were supported by grants from the CNRS InSHS ("Soutien à la Mobilité Internationale" program) and the IFAS (French Institute of South Africa) for fieldwork data collection. I take this opportunity to warmly thank my Sena language consultants for their help and patience.

## Abbreviations

1, 2, 3... = noun class
1SG/PL, 2SG/PL =
grammatical persons
.I, .II, .III = demonstrative
series (.I 'proximal', .II
'medial', .III 'distal')
AGRP = agreement prefix
AM = associated motion
APPL = applicative
COM = comitative
CONN = connective
COP = copula
CVB = converb
DEM = demonstrative
DIM = diminutive
EMPH = emphatic

FV = final vowel
HAB = habitual
IDEO = ideophone
INF = infinitive
INT = intensive
INTERJ = interjection
IPFV = imperfective
ITV = itive
NARR = narrative
NEG = negation
NTR = neuter
OP = object prefix
PASS = passive
PFV = perfective
PLA = plural addressee
POSS = possessive

PRO = pronoun
PROG = progressive
PRS = present
PST = past
REL = relative
RED = reduplication
SEQ = sequential
SG = singular
SIT = situative
SP = subject prefix
VOC = vocative
VTV = ventive

## References

Akita, Kimi & Prashant Pardeshi (eds.). 2019. *Ideophones, mimetics and expressives*. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Alves, Albano Padre. 1939. *Noções gramaticais da língua chisena*. Braga: Missões Fransiscanas.

Ameka, Felix K. 2001. Ideophones and the nature of the adjective word class in Ewe. In F. K. Erhard Voeltz & Christa Kilian-Hatz (eds.), *Ideophones*, 25–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Anderson, W.G. 1897. *An introductory grammar of the Sena language*. London: Society for promoting Christian knowledge.

Andrason, Alexander. 2017. The “exotic” nature of ideophones - From Khoekhoe to Xhosa. Part 1. *Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics* 48. 139–150.

Andrason, Alexander. 2020. Ideophones as linguistic “rebels” - The extra-systematicity of ideophones in Xhosa. Part 1. *Asian and African Studies* 29(2). 119–165.

Childs, G. Tucker. 1994. African ideophones. In Leanne Hinton, Johanna Nichols & John J. Ohala (eds.), *Sound symbolism*, 178–204. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Childs, Tucker G. 2003. *An introduction to African languages*. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Cole, Desmond T. 1955. *An introduction to Tswana grammar*. London: Longmans Green.

Courtenay, Karen R. 1976. Ideophones defined as a phonological class: The case of Yoruba. In Larry M. Hyman, Leon C. Jacobson & Russell B. Schuh (eds.), *Papers in African linguistics in honor of W. M. Welmers.*, 13–26. Los Angeles: University of California.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2012. Advances in the cross-linguistic study of ideophones. *Language and Linguistics Compass* 6(10). 654–672.

Dingemanse, Mark, Damián E. Blasi, Gary Lupyan, Morten H. Christiansen & Padraic Monaghan. 2015. Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language. *Trends in Cognitive Sciences* 19(10). 603–615.

Doke, Clement M. 1931. *A comparative study in Shona phonetics*. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand Press.

Doke, Clement M. 1935. *Bantu linguistic terminology*. New York: Longmans, Green & Co.

Doke, Clement M. 1954. *The Southern Bantu languages*. London: Oxford University Press.

Downing, Laura J. 2019. Tumbuka prosody: Between tone and stress. In Emily Clem, Peter Jenks & Hannah Sande (eds.), *Theory and description in African linguistics: Selected papers from the 47th Annual Conference on African Linguistics*, 75–94. Berlin: Language Science Press.

Downing, Laura J & Barbara Stiebels. 2012. Iconicity. In Jochen Trommer (ed.), *The morphology and phonology of exponence*, 379–426. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fortune, George. 1961. *Ideophones in Shona*. London: Oxford University Press.

Funnell, Barry J. 2004. *A contrastive analysis of two standardized varieties of Sena*. Pretoria: University of South Africa MA dissertation.
Anderson, W.G. 1897. *An introductory grammar of the Sena language*. London: Society for promoting Christian knowledge.

Andrason, Alexander. 2017. The “exotic” nature of ideophones - From Khoekhoe to Xhosa. Part 1. *Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics* 48. 139–150.

Andrason, Alexander. 2020. Ideophones as linguistic “rebels” - The extra-systematicity of ideophones in Xhosa. Part 1. *Asian and African Studies* 29(2). 119–165.

Childs, G. Tucker. 1994. African ideophones. In Leanne Hinton, Johanna Nichols & John J. Ohala (eds.), *Sound symbolism*, 178–204. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Childs, Tucker G. 2003. *An introduction to African languages*. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Cole, Desmond T. 1955. *An introduction to Tswana grammar*. London: Longmans Green.

Courtenay, Karen R. 1976. Ideophones defined as a phonological class: The case of Yoruba. In Larry M. Hyman, Leon C. Jacobson & Russell B. Schuh (eds.), *Papers in African linguistics in honor of W. M. Welmers.*, 13–26. Los Angeles: University of California.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2012. Advances in the cross-linguistic study of ideophones. *Language and Linguistics Compass* 6(10). 654–672.

Dingemanse, Mark, Damián E. Blasi, Gary Lupyan, Morten H. Christiansen & Padraic Monaghan. 2015. Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language. *Trends in Cognitive Sciences* 19(10). 603–615.

Doke, Clement M. 1931. *A comparative study in Shona phonetics*. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand Press.

Doke, Clement M. 1935. *Bantu linguistic terminology*. New York: Longmans, Green & Co.

Doke, Clement M. 1954. *The Southern Bantu languages*. London: Oxford University Press.

Downing, Laura J. 2019. Tumbuka prosody: Between tone and stress. In Emily Clem, Peter Jenks & Hannah Sande (eds.), *Theory and description in African linguistics: Selected papers from the 47th Annual Conference on African Linguistics*, 75–94. Berlin: Language Science Press.

Downing, Laura J & Barbara Stiebels. 2012. Iconicity. In Jochen Trommer (ed.), *The morphology and phonology of exponence*, 379–426. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fortune, George. 1961. *Ideophones in Shona*. London: Oxford University Press.

Funnell, Barry J. 2004. *A contrastive analysis of two standardized varieties of Sena*. Pretoria: University of South Africa MA dissertation.
Grégoire, Claire. 1975. *Les locatifs en bantou*. Tervuren: Royal Museum for Central Africa.

Güldemann, Tom. 1999. The genesis of verbal negation in Bantu and its dependency on functional features of clause types. In Jean-Marie Hombert & Larry M. Hyman (eds.), *Bantu historical linguistics: Theoretical and empirical perspectives*, 545–587. Stanford: CSLI.

Güldemann, Tom. 2008. *Quotative indexes in African languages. A synchronic and diachronic survey*. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Güldemann, Tom & Ines Fiedler. 2019. Niger-Congo “noun classes” conflate gender with deriflection. In Francesca Di Garbo, Bruno Olsson & Bernhard Wälchli (eds.), *Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity: Volume I: General issues and specific studies*, 95–145. Berlin: Language Science Press.

Guthrie, Malcolm. 1967. *Comparative Bantu: An introduction to the comparative linguistics and prehistory of the Bantu languages. Part I, Volume 1: The comparative linguistics of the Bantu languages*. Farnborough: Gregg Press.

Haiman, John. 2018. *Ideophones and the evolution of language*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hinton, Leanne, Johanna Nichols & John J. Ohala (eds.). 1994. *Sound symbolism*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hulstaert, Gustaaf. 1938. *Praktische Grammatica van het Lonkundo (Lomongo)*. Antwerpen: De Sikkel.

Instituto Nacional de Estatísticas. 2017. *IV recenseamento geral da população e habitação 2017*. Mozambique: Instituto Nacional de Estatísticas.

Jespersen, Otto. 1965. *A modern English grammar on historical principles. Part VI Morphology*. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.

Jones, Michael Allen. 1988. Cognate objects and the case filter. *Journal of Linguistics* 24. 89–111.

Kilian-Hatz, Christa. 1999. *Ideophone: Eine typologische Untersuchung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung afrikanischer Sprachen*. Habilitation (postdoctoral) thesis, University of Cologne.

Kiso, Andrea. 2012. *Tense and aspect in Chichewa, Citumbuka, and Cisena*. Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University.

Kunene, Daniel P. 1978. *The ideophone in Southern Sotho*. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.

Levin, Beth. 1993. *English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation*. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Grégoire, Claire. 1975. *Les locatifs en bantou*. Tervuren: Royal Museum for Central Africa.

Güldemann, Tom. 1999. The genesis of verbal negation in Bantu and its dependency on functional features of clause types. In Jean-Marie Hombert & Larry M. Hyman (eds.), *Bantu historical linguistics: Theoretical and empirical perspectives*, 545–587. Stanford: CSLI.

Güldemann, Tom. 2008. *Quotative indexes in African languages. A synchronic and diachronic survey*. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Güldemann, Tom & Ines Fiedler. 2019. Niger-Congo “noun classes” conflate gender with deriflection. In Francesca Di Garbo, Bruno Olsson & Bernhard Wälchli (eds.), *Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity: Volume I: General issues and specific studies*, 95–145. Berlin: Language Science Press.

Guthrie, Malcolm. 1967. *Comparative Bantu: An introduction to the comparative linguistics and prehistory of the Bantu languages. Part I, Volume 1: The comparative linguistics of the Bantu languages*. Farnborough: Gregg Press.

Haiman, John. 2018. *Ideophones and the evolution of language*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hinton, Leanne, Johanna Nichols & John J. Ohala (eds.). 1994. *Sound symbolism*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hulstaert, Gustaaf. 1938. *Praktische Grammatica van het Lonkundo (Lomongo)*. Antwerpen: De Sikkel.

Instituto Nacional de Estatísticas. 2017. *IV recenseamento geral da população e habitação 2017*. Mozambique: Instituto Nacional de Estatísticas.

Jespersen, Otto. 1965. *A modern English grammar on historical principles. Part VI Morphology*. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.

Jones, Michael Allen. 1988. Cognate objects and the case filter. *Journal of Linguistics* 24. 89–111.

Kilian-Hatz, Christa. 1999. *Ideophone: Eine typologische Untersuchung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung afrikanischer Sprachen*. Habilitation (postdoctoral) thesis, University of Cologne.

Kiso, Andrea. 2012. *Tense and aspect in Chichewa, Citumbuka, and Cisena*. Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University.

Kunene, Daniel P. 1978. *The ideophone in Southern Sotho*. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.

Levin, Beth. 1993. *English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation*. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Meeussen, Achilles E. 1959. *Essai de grammaire Rundi*. Tervuren: Musée Royal du Congo
Belge.

Meeussen, Achilles E. 1967. Bantu grammatical reconstructions. *Africana Linguistica* 3.
79-121.

Meinhof, Carl. 1912. *Die Sprache der Duala in Kamerun*. Berlin: Verlag von Dietrich Reimer.

Moreira, Alexandre. 1924. *Practical grammatical notes of the Sena language*. St Gabriel-Mödling (Austria): Anthropos.

Moshi, Lioba. 1993. Ideophones in KiVunjo-Chaga. *Journal of Linguistic Anthropology* 3(2). 185–216.

Nurse, Derek & Gérard Philippson (eds.). 2003. *The Bantu languages*. London: Routledge.

Prieto, Fernando Pérez. 2015. *Elementos da língua chisena e da cultura do povo de Sena*. Balaka (Malawi): Sociedade dos Missionários de África.

Samarin, William J. 1971. Survey of Bantu ideophones. *African Language Studies* 12.
130–168.

Schultze-Berndt, Eva. 2001. Ideophone-like characteristics of uninflected predicates in Jaminjung (Australia). In Erhard F. K. Voeltz & Christa Kilian-Hatz (eds.), *Ideophones*, 355–373. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Steriade, Donca. 1988. Reduplication and syllable transfer in Sanskrit and elsewhere.
*Phonology* 5. 73–155.

Torrend, Jules. 1900. *Grammatica do Chisena. A grammar of the language of the Lower Zambezi*. Chipanga Zambezia: Missão de Chipanga.

Van de Velde, Mark, Koen Bostoen, Derek Nurse & Gérard Philippson (eds.). 2019. *The Bantu Languages*. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.

Voeltz, F. K. Erhard & Christa Kilian-Hatz (eds.). 2001. *Ideophones*. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Whiteley, Wilfred H. 1956. *A practical introduction to Gusii*. Nairobi: East African Literature Bureau.

Williamson, Kay & Roger Blench. 2000. Niger-Congo. In Bernd Heine & Derek Nurse (eds.), *African languages: An introduction*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Young, Thomas Cullen. 1932. *Notes on the speech of the Tumbuka-Kamanga peoples*.
London: Religious Tract Society.

CONTACT

rozenn.guerois@cnrs.fr
Meeussen, Achilles E. 1959. *Essai de grammaire Rundi*. Tervuren: Musée Royal du Congo
Belge.

Meeussen, Achilles E. 1967. Bantu grammatical reconstructions. *Africana Linguistica* 3.
79-121.

Meinhof, Carl. 1912. *Die Sprache der Duala in Kamerun*. Berlin: Verlag von Dietrich Reimer.

Moreira, Alexandre. 1924. *Practical grammatical notes of the Sena language*. St Gabriel-Mödling (Austria): Anthropos.

Moshi, Lioba. 1993. Ideophones in KiVunjo-Chaga. *Journal of Linguistic Anthropology* 3(2). 185–216.

Nurse, Derek & Gérard Philippson (eds.). 2003. *The Bantu languages*. London: Routledge.

Prieto, Fernando Pérez. 2015. *Elementos da língua chisena e da cultura do povo de Sena*. Balaka (Malawi): Sociedade dos Missionários de África.

Samarin, William J. 1971. Survey of Bantu ideophones. *African Language Studies* 12.
130–168.

Schultze-Berndt, Eva. 2001. Ideophone-like characteristics of uninflected predicates in Jaminjung (Australia). In Erhard F. K. Voeltz & Christa Kilian-Hatz (eds.), *Ideophones*, 355–373. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Steriade, Donca. 1988. Reduplication and syllable transfer in Sanskrit and elsewhere.
*Phonology* 5. 73–155.

Torrend, Jules. 1900. *Grammatica do Chisena. A grammar of the language of the Lower Zambezi*. Chipanga Zambezia: Missão de Chipanga.

Van de Velde, Mark, Koen Bostoen, Derek Nurse & Gérard Philippson (eds.). 2019. *The Bantu Languages*. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.

Voeltz, F. K. Erhard & Christa Kilian-Hatz (eds.). 2001. *Ideophones*. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Whiteley, Wilfred H. 1956. *A practical introduction to Gusii*. Nairobi: East African Literature Bureau.

Williamson, Kay & Roger Blench. 2000. Niger-Congo. In Bernd Heine & Derek Nurse (eds.), *African languages: An introduction*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Young, Thomas Cullen. 1932. *Notes on the speech of the Tumbuka-Kamanga peoples*.
London: Religious Tract Society.

CONTACT

rozenn.guerois@cnrs.fr
# Ideophones and sound symbolism in Northern Amis
(Austronesian)

ISABELLE BRIL

CNRS, UMR 7107 LANGUES ET CIVILISATIONS À TRADITION ORALE & LABEX EFL

Submitted: 10/01/2023 Revised version: 07/02/2024

Accepted: 08/02/2024 Published: 12/06/2024

<figure><img src="image_23.png" /></figure>

Articles are published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (The authors remain the copyright holders and grant third parties the right to use, reproduce, and share the article).

## Abstract

This is a study of ideophones in Northern Amis, an East Formosan, Austronesian language of Taiwan. Ideophones depict sensory experiences, and they generally have the same phonological and phonotactic properties as other lexemes; however, some ideophones show consonant and vowel alternations denoting grades of intensity or pitch, and a number of ideophones denoting bad smells and tastes are characterized by specific sequences of phonemes. Crucially, beyond their purely depictive function, many ideophones are also used to describe sensory experiences, in which case, they are derived and inflected as verbs, modifiers and nouns; yet, their greater grammatical integration does not necessarily lead to the loss of their ideophonic properties. Rather, these two functions, depiction and description, are better seen as occurring on a continuum between two poles, as in Japanese (Dingemanse & Akita 2017). Only when the depictive function and the pairing of form and sensory depiction are lost do these lexemes become de-ideophonic, generally taking on non-sensorial semantics.

**Keywords:** Austronesian, ideophones, onomatopoeia, sound symbolism.

## 1. Introduction

Amis (ami) is one of the fourteen surviving Austronesian (also called Formosan) languages of Taiwan, spoken along the east coast. Northern Amis, one of the four main dialects, is spoken in the north-east around the city of Hualien. The other dialects
# Ideophones and sound symbolism in Northern Amis
(Austronesian)

ISABELLE BRIL

CNRS, UMR 7107 LANGUES ET CIVILISATIONS À TRADITION ORALE & LABEX EFL

Submitted: 10/01/2023 Revised version: 07/02/2024

Accepted: 08/02/2024 Published: 12/06/2024

<figure><img src="image_23.png" /></figure>

Articles are published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (The authors remain the copyright holders and grant third parties the right to use, reproduce, and share the article).

## Abstract

This is a study of ideophones in Northern Amis, an East Formosan, Austronesian language of Taiwan. Ideophones depict sensory experiences, and they generally have the same phonological and phonotactic properties as other lexemes; however, some ideophones show consonant and vowel alternations denoting grades of intensity or pitch, and a number of ideophones denoting bad smells and tastes are characterized by specific sequences of phonemes. Crucially, beyond their purely depictive function, many ideophones are also used to describe sensory experiences, in which case, they are derived and inflected as verbs, modifiers and nouns; yet, their greater grammatical integration does not necessarily lead to the loss of their ideophonic properties. Rather, these two functions, depiction and description, are better seen as occurring on a continuum between two poles, as in Japanese (Dingemanse & Akita 2017). Only when the depictive function and the pairing of form and sensory depiction are lost do these lexemes become de-ideophonic, generally taking on non-sensorial semantics.

**Keywords:** Austronesian, ideophones, onomatopoeia, sound symbolism.

## 1. Introduction

Amis (ami) is one of the fourteen surviving Austronesian (also called Formosan) languages of Taiwan, spoken along the east coast. Northern Amis, one of the four main dialects, is spoken in the north-east around the city of Hualien. The other dialects
are Tavalong-Vataan, Central, and Southern Amis; they display significant differences in phonology, lexicon and morphosyntax (Tsuchida 1988), and according to native consultants, they are not immediately mutually intelligible.

Ideophones are an understudied topic in Formosan languages and in other Austronesian languages in general, leading Klamer (2001: 171) to write that Kambera (xbr; East Sumbanese, Indonesia) is “one of the few Austronesian languages with ideophones, or more accurately, with documented ideophones”. The most recent research on this topic in Western Austronesian languages is Lee’s (2017) on Seediq (trv; Formosan), and Rubino’s (2001) on Ilocano (ilo; Philippines). In his pioneering study of Austronesian roots, Blust (1988, 2009: 357, 2022) identified around 23% of CVC roots as being “onomatopoetic”; many of these roots have reflexes in Northern Amis (see Table 5 in the Appendix).

## 1.1. A brief typological outlook on Amis

Some features of Amis, restricted to information central for the understanding of ideophones, are briefly presented. Amis is a verb/predicate initial language with a complex voice system. Most lexical roots are categorially neutral, and most lexical categories (nouns, verbs, modifiers, etc.) are identified once lexical roots have been derived and inflected as stems in a given syntactic environment (Bril 2017). Common nouns and action nouns (like *a call*, *a jump*, etc.) are flagged by the noun marker *u*. Verbs are derived by voice-affixes that are selected in accordance with the prominent thematic role of the nominative argument, i.e., Actor Voice (AV) *mi-* if the nominative argument is an Actor; Non-Actor Voice (NAV) *ma-* for stative verbs whose nominative argument is an Experiencer or the locus of a property; Undergoer Voice (UV) *ma-* if it is a patient, etc. For instance, the root √cudad occurs as a noun *u cudad* ‘letter, book’ and as a verb derived for AV *mi-cudad* ‘study’; √talem occurs as a noun in *u talem* ‘a blade’, and as a stative verb derived as NAV in *ma-talem* ‘sharp’. Amis has a symmetrical voice system and bipartite alignment, the details of which are spelled out in Bril (2022). Constructions with AV *mi-* and NAV *ma-* select the absolutive alignment with nominative *k-* and a core argument case-marked by oblique *t-*; UV constructions have ergative alignment, with a nominative *k-* Undergoer and a genitive agent marked by *n-*.

Ideophones in Amis DEPICT perceptions and occur in their base form followed by *sa* ‘say’ or *han* ‘do so’. Some of them are also used to DESCRIBE perceptions, they are then derived and inflected as verbs, nouns, modifiers like other lexical roots, raising questions
are Tavalong-Vataan, Central, and Southern Amis; they display significant differences in phonology, lexicon and morphosyntax (Tsuchida 1988), and according to native consultants, they are not immediately mutually intelligible.

Ideophones are an understudied topic in Formosan languages and in other Austronesian languages in general, leading Klamer (2001: 171) to write that Kambera (xbr; East Sumbanese, Indonesia) is “one of the few Austronesian languages with ideophones, or more accurately, with documented ideophones”. The most recent research on this topic in Western Austronesian languages is Lee’s (2017) on Seediq (trv; Formosan), and Rubino’s (2001) on Ilocano (ilo; Philippines). In his pioneering study of Austronesian roots, Blust (1988, 2009: 357, 2022) identified around 23% of CVC roots as being “onomatopoetic”; many of these roots have reflexes in Northern Amis (see Table 5 in the Appendix).

## 1.1. A brief typological outlook on Amis

Some features of Amis, restricted to information central for the understanding of ideophones, are briefly presented. Amis is a verb/predicate initial language with a complex voice system. Most lexical roots are categorially neutral, and most lexical categories (nouns, verbs, modifiers, etc.) are identified once lexical roots have been derived and inflected as stems in a given syntactic environment (Bril 2017). Common nouns and action nouns (like *a call*, *a jump*, etc.) are flagged by the noun marker *u*. Verbs are derived by voice-affixes that are selected in accordance with the prominent thematic role of the nominative argument, i.e., Actor Voice (AV) *mi-* if the nominative argument is an Actor; Non-Actor Voice (NAV) *ma-* for stative verbs whose nominative argument is an Experiencer or the locus of a property; Undergoer Voice (UV) *ma-* if it is a patient, etc. For instance, the root √cudad occurs as a noun *u cudad* ‘letter, book’ and as a verb derived for AV *mi-cudad* ‘study’; √talem occurs as a noun in *u talem* ‘a blade’, and as a stative verb derived as NAV in *ma-talem* ‘sharp’. Amis has a symmetrical voice system and bipartite alignment, the details of which are spelled out in Bril (2022). Constructions with AV *mi-* and NAV *ma-* select the absolutive alignment with nominative *k-* and a core argument case-marked by oblique *t-*; UV constructions have ergative alignment, with a nominative *k-* Undergoer and a genitive agent marked by *n-*.

Ideophones in Amis DEPICT perceptions and occur in their base form followed by *sa* ‘say’ or *han* ‘do so’. Some of them are also used to DESCRIBE perceptions, they are then derived and inflected as verbs, nouns, modifiers like other lexical roots, raising questions
as to whether they still count as ideophones; however, this grammatical integration does
not necessarily lead to lost ideophonic properties, but is best seen as a continuum, the
loss of ideophonic properties being concomitant with the complete loss of their basic
depictive function.

1.2. *A note on the glossing and translation of ideophones*

Some ideophones are glossed with a translation when they have a dedicated meaning, like *kapkap* ‘IDEO.grope (in the dark)’ in example (7) or *pikpik* ‘IDEO.flap (wings)’ in (9). Ideophones whose specific meaning is context-dependent are glossed IDEO along with their contextual meaning given in the translation line; one such case is *telaq* which depicts the sound of rifle shots, clapping, firecrackers (see example (29)). A translation is also given when an ideophone has a slightly different meaning as a verb and as a noun, like *kela~kelaq* in (28), which depicts a clattering noise and also refers to a tipcart producing such noise, it is glossed as IDEO tipcart.

The paper proceeds as follows; the characteristic features of Amis ideophones and the
differences with onomatopoeia are discussed in Section 2; some aspects of ideophones
and their connection to sound symbolism are the focus of section 3, this includes
ideophones with a templatic sequence of phonemes depicting bad smells and tastes;
Section 4 teases apart the depictive vs. descriptive usages of ideophones possibly leading
to lost ideophonic features. Northern Amis ideophones are put in a typological
perspective in Section 5, and in a Formosan perspective in Section 6; Section 7 concludes.

2. The characteristic features of Amis ideophones

Ideophones are an open lexical class and are “marked words that depict some sensory
imagery” (Dingemanse 2011: 25). In Amis, these lexemes depict sounds and other
perceptions. Amis speakers do not have a specific label for them; in the three existing
dictionaries, which mostly bear on Central Amis (Fey 1986, Poinsot & Pourrias 1966,
Rata 2013), some ideophones are listed and translated as ‘having or making the sound
of’. This study is based on a corpus of recorded oral productions,<fnref n="1" /> completed by data
collected with stimuli.<fnref n="2" />

<footnote n="1">¹ The corpus contains several hours of spontaneous oral productions (stories of various types and procedural texts), collected over approximately fourteen months of fieldwork in several villages in and around the city of Hualien.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Some of McLean's (2021) auditory stimuli were used, they are found at https://osf.io/y9rk2/.</footnote>
as to whether they still count as ideophones; however, this grammatical integration does
not necessarily lead to lost ideophonic properties, but is best seen as a continuum, the
loss of ideophonic properties being concomitant with the complete loss of their basic
depictive function.

1.2. *A note on the glossing and translation of ideophones*

Some ideophones are glossed with a translation when they have a dedicated meaning, like *kapkap* ‘IDEO.grope (in the dark)’ in example (7) or *pikpik* ‘IDEO.flap (wings)’ in (9). Ideophones whose specific meaning is context-dependent are glossed IDEO along with their contextual meaning given in the translation line; one such case is *telaq* which depicts the sound of rifle shots, clapping, firecrackers (see example (29)). A translation is also given when an ideophone has a slightly different meaning as a verb and as a noun, like *kela~kelaq* in (28), which depicts a clattering noise and also refers to a tipcart producing such noise, it is glossed as IDEO tipcart.

The paper proceeds as follows; the characteristic features of Amis ideophones and the
differences with onomatopoeia are discussed in Section 2; some aspects of ideophones
and their connection to sound symbolism are the focus of section 3, this includes
ideophones with a templatic sequence of phonemes depicting bad smells and tastes;
Section 4 teases apart the depictive vs. descriptive usages of ideophones possibly leading
to lost ideophonic features. Northern Amis ideophones are put in a typological
perspective in Section 5, and in a Formosan perspective in Section 6; Section 7 concludes.

2. The characteristic features of Amis ideophones

Ideophones are an open lexical class and are “marked words that depict some sensory
imagery” (Dingemanse 2011: 25). In Amis, these lexemes depict sounds and other
perceptions. Amis speakers do not have a specific label for them; in the three existing
dictionaries, which mostly bear on Central Amis (Fey 1986, Poinsot & Pourrias 1966,
Rata 2013), some ideophones are listed and translated as ‘having or making the sound
of’. This study is based on a corpus of recorded oral productions,<fnref n="1" /> completed by data
collected with stimuli.<fnref n="2" />

<footnote n="1">¹ The corpus contains several hours of spontaneous oral productions (stories of various types and procedural texts), collected over approximately fourteen months of fieldwork in several villages in and around the city of Hualien.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Some of McLean's (2021) auditory stimuli were used, they are found at https://osf.io/y9rk2/.</footnote>
## 2.1. Phonological, phonotactic and prosodic features of Amis ideophones

Ideophones use the same phonemic inventory of vowels (/i, ə, a, u/) and consonants<fnref n="3" /> as other lexemes and contain no unusual phonemes. Like other lexemes, ideophones may have expressive vowel lengthening on their last syllable; this type of prosodic augmentation expresses duration or intensity as in *ca::s* [tsa::s]<fnref n="4" /> ‘sizzling sound’, as well as emotional reactions or evaluation. Vowel lengthening also occurs on verbs, negative morphemes, quantifiers, adverbs, expressing degree and pragmatic emphasis or focus (Bril & Skopeteas 2021: 75-76).

Ideophones follow the same general phonotactic rules as other lexemes in Amis: there are no complex onsets, nor complex codas; yet, in fast speech, unstressed /ə/ may be dropped between a stop and an approximant consonant, resulting in restricted types of clusters, such as *t(e)ra~t(e)raq* [tratráʔʰ] ‘sound of gun fire’ (from *teraq* [təraʔʰ]), *k(e)loh* ‘go thump’.<fnref n="5" /> Vowel-initial and vowel-final words are not allowed, and consequently there are rule-inserted glottal stops in such positions, as in *ʔahteng* ‘smell of feces, rotten meat’, *kurukuruʔ* ‘IDEO.tumble.down’. Word-internally, syllables can be open as in *keris* ‘scratch’ or closed as in *rasmas* ‘drizzle’. Ideophones follow the same stress rule as other words, with stress occurring on the last syllable of fully inflected words (Bril 2016, Bril & Skopeteas 2021).

Like all lexical roots, ideophones in their base form can be monosyllabic CVC or disyllabic CV(C)CVC, and they can be reduplicated. When the base and the reduplicated forms co-exist, reduplication is then signaled, as with *kung* depicting a single hollow knocking sound (of a big bell) and *kung~kung* for repeated sounds. Ideophones that do not occur as simple bases are written as one word, for instance *pikpik* ‘sound and movement of flapping wings’, or *kurukuruʔ* depicting the VISUAL effect of tumbling or rolling down. Reduplication is very common, and occurs at the left edge of all lexical roots with various grammatical functions: e.g., reduplicated CVC(V)~ stems used as verbs like *tela~telaq* ‘clap, crackle’ have aspectual, semelfactive or durative meanings, and CVC(V)~ reduplication of nouns has plural, collective or exhaustive meanings. In yet other cases, reduplication may have an expressive use.

<footnote n="3">³ /ə/ is written <e>; /u/ has an allophone /o/ before velar /k/, epiglottal <q> /ʔ/ and pharyngeal fricative /h/; the glottal stop is written <? >.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Lengthening is marked by colons [::].</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ In Central Amis, *kloh* depicts the sound of something falling or a sound made in the throat (Rata 2013).</footnote>
**2.1. Phonological, phonotactic and prosodic features of Amis ideophones**

Ideophones use the same phonemic inventory of vowels (/i, ə, a, u/) and consonants<fnref n="3" /> as other lexemes and contain no unusual phonemes. Like other lexemes, ideophones may have expressive vowel lengthening on their last syllable; this type of prosodic augmentation expresses duration or intensity as in *ca::s* [tsa::s]<fnref n="4" /> ‘sizzling sound’, as well as emotional reactions or evaluation. Vowel lengthening also occurs on verbs, negative morphemes, quantifiers, adverbs, expressing degree and pragmatic emphasis or focus (Bril & Skopeteas 2021: 75-76).

Ideophones follow the same general phonotactic rules as other lexemes in Amis: there are no complex onsets, nor complex codas; yet, in fast speech, unstressed /ə/ may be dropped between a stop and an approximant consonant, resulting in restricted types of clusters, such as *t(e)ra~t(e)raq* [tratráʔh] ‘sound of gun fire’ (from *teraq* [təraʔh]), *k(e)loh* ‘go thump’.<fnref n="5" /> Vowel-initial and vowel-final words are not allowed, and consequently there are rule-inserted glottal stops in such positions, as in *ʔahteng* ‘smell of feces, rotten meat’, *kurukuruʔ* ‘IDEO.tumble.down’. Word-internally, syllables can be open as in *keris* ‘scratch’ or closed as in *rasmas* ‘drizzle’. Ideophones follow the same stress rule as other words, with stress occurring on the last syllable of fully inflected words (Bril 2016, Bril & Skopeteas 2021).

Like all lexical roots, ideophones in their base form can be monosyllabic CVC or disyllabic CV(C)CVC, and they can be reduplicated. When the base and the reduplicated forms co-exist, reduplication is then signaled, as with *kung* depicting a single hollow knocking sound (of a big bell) and *kung~kung* for repeated sounds. Ideophones that do not occur as simple bases are written as one word, for instance *pikpik* ‘sound and movement of flapping wings’, or *kurukuruʔ* depicting the VISUAL effect of tumbling or rolling down. Reduplication is very common, and occurs at the left edge of all lexical roots with various grammatical functions: e.g., reduplicated CVC(V)~ stems used as verbs like *tela~telaq* ‘clap, crackle’ have aspectual, semelfactive or durative meanings, and CVC(V)~ reduplication of nouns has plural, collective or exhaustive meanings. In yet other cases, reduplication may have an expressive use.

<footnote n="3">³ /ə/ is written <e>; /u/ has an allophone /o/ before velar /k/, epiglottal <q> /ʔ/ and pharyngeal fricative /h/; the glottal stop is written <?>.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Lengthening is marked by colons [::].</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ In Central Amis, *kloh* depicts the sound of something falling or a sound made in the throat (Rata 2013).</footnote>
## 2.2. The contrastive features of ideophones and onomatopeia

Ideophones and onomatopeia are open lexical classes depicting sensory experiences.
There are however differences between them.

### 2.2.1 Onomatopeia

Onomatopeia in Amis are strictly **SOUND** depicting; they can be used holophrastically
like *bling*<fnref n="6" /> in (1), depicting the sound of breaking glass, or like *pang* and *pes* in (2).

(1) ha! u tingalaway = aku! bling!
INTJ NM glass.pot = NOM.1SG ONOM
“ah! my glass pot!” “bling!” (Frog story_Ciyaw.020)<fnref n="7" />

(2) “pang pes!”<fnref n="8" /> ma-paqtiw cira namaka puhung n-u ngabur!
ONOM ONOM UV-eject NOM.3SG from horn GEN-NM deer
“thump splash!” He was thrown off the deer’s antlers!’ (into the water)
(Frog story_Ciyaw.057)

Most onomatopeia are words of one or two syllables with the canonical syllabic CVC
or CV(C)CVC structure; however, a few are less canonical and have a protracted vowel
as in (3), or a protracted consonant, like ssss for a hissing sound. They also occur as
direct speech acts followed by the quotative verb sa ‘say’ as in (3) and (4), where tus
depicts the sound produced by a thrown object.<fnref n="9" />

(3) Wuuu sa k-ira wacu.
ONOM say NOM-DEIC dog
“wooo” went the dog. (Frog story_Ciyaw.019)

<footnote n="6">⁶ Its non-canonical syllabic structure CCVC is due to the loss of an unstressed /ə/, *b(e)ling*.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ These are texts references under Toolbox.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ *Pes!* also depicts the sound of ritual wine-spraying with the mouth, performed by shamans to the gods. Ideophones and onomatopeia in relation to shamanistic practices require further investigation.</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹ The use of *sa* as an “ideophone forming construction” is briefly mentioned in Central Amis by Wu (2006: 148).</footnote>
## 2.2. The contrastive features of ideophones and onomatopeia

Ideophones and onomatopeia are open lexical classes depicting sensory experiences.
There are however differences between them.

### 2.2.1 Onomatopeia

Onomatopeia in Amis are strictly **SOUND** depicting; they can be used holophrastically
like *bling*<fnref n="6" /> in (1), depicting the sound of breaking glass, or like *pang* and *pes* in (2).

(1) ha! u tingalaway = aku! bling!
INTJ NM glass.pot = NOM.1SG ONOM
“ah! my glass pot!” “bling!” (Frog story_Ciyaw.020)<fnref n="7" />

(2) “pang pes!”<fnref n="8" /> ma-paqtiw cira namaka puhung n-u ngabur!
ONOM ONOM UV-eject NOM.3SG from horn GEN-NM deer
“thump splash!” He was thrown off the deer’s antlers!’ (into the water)
(Frog story_Ciyaw.057)

Most onomatopeia are words of one or two syllables with the canonical syllabic CVC
or CV(C)CVC structure; however, a few are less canonical and have a protracted vowel
as in (3), or a protracted consonant, like ssss for a hissing sound. They also occur as
direct speech acts followed by the quotative verb sa ‘say’ as in (3) and (4), where tus
depicts the sound produced by a thrown object.<fnref n="9" />

(3) Wuuu sa k-ira wacu.
ONOM say NOM-DEIC dog
“wooo” went the dog. (Frog story_Ciyaw.019)

<footnote n="6">⁶ Its non-canonical syllabic structure CCVC is due to the loss of an unstressed /ə/, *b(e)ling*.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ These are texts references under Toolbox.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ *Pes!* also depicts the sound of ritual wine-spraying with the mouth, performed by shamans to the gods. Ideophones and onomatopeia in relation to shamanistic practices require further investigation.</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹ The use of *sa* as an “ideophone forming construction” is briefly mentioned in Central Amis by Wu (2006: 148).</footnote>
(4) *Tus* *sa* = *tu* *itini* *i* *ka*~*ka*-butiq-an.

ONOM say = PFV here LOC RDP~NFIN-sleep-NMZ

‘It went “swish” here onto the bed.’ (Tatakulaq atu Hungti.029)

Another distinctive criterion is the fact that onomatopoeia are often repeated as prosodically distinct words of one or two syllables, like *tak tak tak* for the sound of rifles or machine-guns, or clattering sounds made by walking with clogs. Example (5) shows the repeated onomatopoeia *pungpung*.

(5) *Pungpung pungpung pungpung* *sa* = *tu*.

ONOM say = PFV

“Pungpung pungpung pungpung” it went.’ (Tatakulaq atu Hungti (2).0058)

Other cases of repeated onomatopoeia are: *ki ki ki* for the sound of some birds; *kir kir kir* for the sound of small frogs and some birds; *yi yi yi* for the sound of dogs squealing; *ciya ciya ciya* for the sound of cicadas; *sing sing sing sing* for the sound of bells; *kiya kiya kiya* for the sound of rain; *tita tita* for the sound of clocks, of horse steps, of rain;<fnref n="10" /> *tata tata* for the sound of people speaking; *kulu kulu kulu*, which depicts the sound of something falling into water as in (6), and a gurgling water or belly sound.

(6) *Kulu kulu kulu* *sa*-an *a* *mu*-lenek *i* *tebun*.

ONOM say-LV LK AV-sink LOC well

‘It went “glug, glug, glug” as it sank into the well.’ (Tatakulaq atu Hungti.029)

### 2.2.2 Ideophones

Out of the 4800 lexemes collected in my dictionary of Northern Amis, about 110 of them (4.4%) are identified as ideophones based on the following features. They are lexemes characterized by a strictly canonical CVC or CV(C)CVC syllabic structure, in contrast with some onomatopoeia that allow protracted vowels as in (3) or protracted consonants. Besides, if they are reduplicated, ideophones make up one prosodic word. Unlike onomatopoeia, ideophones are not holophrastic, and crucially, unlike onomatopoeia, their semantics is not restricted to sounds, they may depict motions or gestures producing a sound. When depictive, ideophones are followed by *sa* ‘say’

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ Possibly a Chinese loan from 嘢嗒 (dídā) ‘tick tock’, 滴答 (dīdā) ‘sound of clock’.</footnote>
(4) *Tus* *sa* = *tu* *itini* *i* *ka*~*ka*-butiq-an.

ONOM say = PFV here LOC RDP~NFIN-sleep-NMZ

‘It went “swish” here onto the bed.’ (Tatakulaq atu Hungti.029)

Another distinctive criterion is the fact that onomatopoeia are often repeated as prosodically distinct words of one or two syllables, like *tak tak tak* for the sound of rifles or machine-guns, or clattering sounds made by walking with clogs. Example (5) shows the repeated onomatopoeia *pungpung*.

(5) *Pungpung pungpung pungpung* *sa* = *tu*.

ONOM say = PFV

“Pungpung pungpung pungpung” it went.’ (Tatakulaq atu Hungti (2).0058)

Other cases of repeated onomatopoeia are: *ki ki ki* for the sound of some birds; *kir kir kir* for the sound of small frogs and some birds; *yi yi yi* for the sound of dogs squealing; *ciya ciya ciya* for the sound of cicadas; *sing sing sing sing* for the sound of bells; *kiya kiya kiya* for the sound of rain; *tita tita* for the sound of clocks, of horse steps, of rain;<fnref n="10" /> *tata tata* for the sound of people speaking; *kulu kulu kulu*, which depicts the sound of something falling into water as in (6), and a gurgling water or belly sound.

(6) *Kulu kulu kulu* *sa*-an *a* *mu*-lenek *i* *tebun*.

ONOM say-LV LK AV-sink LOC well

‘It went “glug, glug, glug” as it sank into the well.’ (Tatakulaq atu Hungti.029)

### 2.2.2 Ideophones

Out of the 4800 lexemes collected in my dictionary of Northern Amis, about 110 of them (4.4%) are identified as ideophones based on the following features. They are lexemes characterized by a strictly canonical CVC or CV(C)CVC syllabic structure, in contrast with some onomatopoeia that allow protracted vowels as in (3) or protracted consonants. Besides, if they are reduplicated, ideophones make up one prosodic word. Unlike onomatopoeia, ideophones are not holophrastic, and crucially, unlike onomatopoeia, their semantics is not restricted to sounds, they may depict motions or gestures producing a sound. When depictive, ideophones are followed by *sa* ‘say’

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ Possibly a Chinese loan from 嘢嗒 (dídā) ‘tick tock’, 滴答 (dīdā) ‘sound of clock’.</footnote>
or *han* ‘do so’ as in (7a), while in their descriptive use, they can be derived as verbs, for instance as an activity AV *mi-* verb in (7b), and more infrequently as nouns. Ideophones denoting VISUAL or TACTILE sensations tend to be followed by the light verb *han* ‘do so’ as in (7a).

(7)

a. *Kapkap han n-ira.*
*IDEO.grope do GEN-3SG*
‘He groped (in the dark).’ (Arakakai.031, Ogawa)

b. *Mi-kapkap cira.*
*AV-IDEO.grope NOM.3SG*
‘He groped (in the dark).’

In (8a) *hiwhiw* depicts a hissing or panting sound, while in (8b) it is derived into a stative *ma-* verb referring to a breathing condition and used descriptively.

(8)

a. *Hiwhiw sa k-u suni n-u pa-hanhan n-ira.*
*IDEO say NOM-NM sound GEN-NM CAUS-breathe GEN-3SG*
‘*IDEO* went the sound of her breathing.’

b. *Ma-hiwhiw cira.*
*NAV-IDEO NOM.3SG*
‘He has asthma.’

In (9a), *pikpik* ‘sound of flapping (wings)’ is used depictively, but in (9b) it is derived as an activity *mi-* verb describing a sound produced by a movement and used descriptively.

(9)

a. *Pikpik han k-u sakubad.*
*IDEO.flap do NOM-NM wing*
‘Flap flap went the wings.’

b. *Mi-pikpik t-u sakubad.*
*NAV-IDEO.flap OBL-NM wing*
‘(It) flaps its wings.’ (U Tawrayan a lutuk.057)
or *han* ‘do so’ as in (7a), while in their descriptive use, they can be derived as verbs,
for instance as an activity AV *mi-* verb in (7b), and more infrequently as nouns.
Ideophones denoting VISUAL or TACTILE sensations tend to be followed by the light verb
*han* ‘do so’ as in (7a).

(7)

a. *Kapkap* han n-ira.

IDEO.grope do GEN-3SG
‘He groped (in the dark).’ (Arakakai.031, Ogawa)

b. *Mi-kapkap* cira.

AV-IDEO.grope NOM.3SG
‘He groped (in the dark).’

In (8a) *hiwhiw* depicts a hissing or panting sound, while in (8b) it is derived into a stative *ma-* verb referring to a breathing condition and used descriptively.

(8)

a. *Hiwhiw* sa k-u suni n-u pa-hanhan n-ira.

IDEO say NOM-NM sound GEN-NM CAUS-breathe GEN-3SG
‘IDEO went the sound of her breathing.’

b. Ma-hiwhiw cira.

NAV-IDEO NOM.3SG
‘He has asthma.’

In (9a), *pikpik* ‘sound of flapping (wings)’ is used depictively, but in (9b) it is derived
as an activity *mi-* verb describing a sound produced by a movement and used
descriptively.

(9)

a. Pikpik han k-u sakubad.

IDEO.flap do NOM-NM wing
‘Flap flap went the wings.’

b. Mi-pikpik t-u sakubad.

NAV-IDEO.flap OBL-NM wing
‘(It) flaps its wings.’ (U Tawrayan a lutuk.057)
Not all ideophones can be used descriptively, and many are only depictive. Ideophones used descriptively are derived and inflected words that are more “grammatically integrated in the morphosyntactic structure of the utterance” (Dingemanse & Akita, 2017: 5-6). Akita (2017) and Dingemanse & Akita (2017) also point out the correlation between grammatical integration and the loss of ideophonic features. In Amis, however, this is a possible, but not necessary correlation. The criterion for assessing their retained ideophonic feature is the necessary pairing of form and sensory expression; only the loss of their depictive use with *sa* ‘say’ is evidence of de-ideophonization. This is developed in section 4.

### 2.2.3. *Grey areas and continuum of usage between onomatopoeia and ideophones*

To sum up, onomatopoeia are holophrastic, can be repeated as prosodically distinct words, while ideophones form a single prosodic word. However, there are a few such lexemes that are used as both onomatopoeia and ideophones. This is shown in (10a-b), the onomatopoeia *ʔaw ʔaw ʔaw* depicts the howl of dogs or human cries of pain, fear or distress, while in (10c), it is used as an ideophone, i.e., as one prosodic word with reduplicated CVC~CVC pattern, derived as an AV *mi-* verb with descriptive and expressive usage; they stand in contrast with non-ideophonic lexemes such as *ungar* ‘yell, shout’, *luwiq* ‘yell, squeal’, *libabuy* ‘bark’ which lack such sound-depicting effects.

(10)

a. “ʔaw ʔaw ʔaw” $sa = tu$ $k-u$ wacuʔ.

ONOM say = PFV NOM-NM dog

‘The dog went “aw aw”.’ (Mikungling tu wacu.027)

b. “ʔaw ʔaw ʔaw” $sa = tu$ ci Mayaw.

ONOM say = PFV PM Mayaw

‘“aw aw” Mayaw said’ (sound of complaint) (U nu tumuk a kungku.185)

c. *Mi-ʔaw~ʔaw* $k-u$ wacu.

AV-RDP~IDEO NOM-NM dog

‘The dogs howled.’ (Mikungling tu wacu.027)

A similar flexible use occurs with *teraq* which is an onomatopoeia followed by *sa* in (11a), and is used as an ideophone in (11b) with partial CVCV~CVCVC reduplication; it occurs
Not all ideophones can be used descriptively, and many are only depictive. Ideophones used descriptively are derived and inflected words that are more “grammatically integrated in the morphosyntactic structure of the utterance” (Dingemanse & Akita, 2017: 5-6). Akita (2017) and Dingemanse & Akita (2017) also point out the correlation between grammatical integration and the loss of ideophonic features. In Amis, however, this is a possible, but not necessary correlation. The criterion for assessing their retained ideophonic feature is the necessary pairing of form and sensory expression; only the loss of their depictive use with *sa* ‘say’ is evidence of de-ideophonization. This is developed in section 4.

### 2.2.3. *Grey areas and continuum of usage between onomatopoeia and ideophones*

To sum up, onomatopoeia are holophrastic, can be repeated as prosodically distinct words, while ideophones form a single prosodic word. However, there are a few such lexemes that are used as both onomatopoeia and ideophones. This is shown in (10a-b), the onomatopoeia *ʔaw ʔaw ʔaw* depicts the howl of dogs or human cries of pain, fear or distress, while in (10c), it is used as an ideophone, i.e., as one prosodic word with reduplicated CVC~CVC pattern, derived as an AV *mi-* verb with descriptive and expressive usage; they stand in contrast with non-ideophonic lexemes such as *ungar* ‘yell, shout’, *luwiq* ‘yell, squeal’, *libabuy* ‘bark’ which lack such sound-depicting effects.

(10)

a. “ʔaw ʔaw ʔaw” *sa* = *tu* *k-u* *wacuʔ*.
ONOM say = PFV NOM-NM dog
‘The dog went “aw aw”.’ (Mikungling tu wacu.027)

b. “ʔaw ʔaw ʔaw” *sa* = *tu* *ci Mayaw*.
ONOM say = PFV PM Mayaw
““aw aw” Mayaw said’ (sound of complaint) (U nu tumuk a kungku.185)

c. *Mi-ʔaw~ʔaw* *k-u* *wacu*.
AV-RDP~IDEO NOM-NM dog
‘The dogs howled.’ (Mikungling tu wacu.027)

A similar flexible use occurs with *teraq* which is an onomatopoeia followed by *sa* in (11a), and is used as an ideophone in (11b) with partial CVCV~CVCVC reduplication; it occurs
as an ideophone with a descriptive function in (11c) where it is derived as an AV mi-
verb, together with the verbalizer sa-; (iii) finally, teraq is used as a noun in (11d).

(11)

a. Teraq teraq teraq teraq tera::q sa k-u remes.
ONOM ONOM:LENGT say NOM-NM blood
'drip drip drip drip dri::p went the blood.' (Pangangan.059)

b. Tera~teraq sa k-u urad i sera.
RDP~IDEO say NOM-NM rain LOC ground
'Splatter went the rain on the ground.'

c. Mi-sa-tera~teraq k-iyan u nanum.
AV-do-RDP~IDEO NOM-DEIC NM water
'The water was splattering.' (Age groups.052)

d. Si cacay a teraq n-u nanum.
EXS one LK IDEO.drop GEN-NM water
'There was one drop of water.'

Despite this flexible range of uses, *teraq* preserves its sensory and expressive properties even when used descriptively. This is precisely what distinguishes it from non-ideophonic lexemes such as *l(e)saq* ‘leak, drip’ or *tesiq* ‘drop, drip’, which denote a process without sound depicting usage and which may not be repeated like *t(e)raq* in (11a).

Table 1 summarizes these distinctions. Onomatopoeia in Column 1 are used holophrastically or as direct speech acts followed by the quotative verb *sa*. Ideophones in column 2 depict a sensory experience, and are followed by *sa* ‘say’, or *han* ‘do so’. Column 3 contains ideophones that can be used both depictively and descriptively, the latter as more grammatically integrated words, i.e., as derived and inflected verbs or nouns like other lexical roots, and which retain their ideophonic properties. On the other hand, column 4 is the point where ideophones have faded or lost ideophonic properties, are even more grammatically integrated, for instance with modifying use. These also favor semantic extension towards non-sensory and more abstract meanings.

2.3 Ideophones with fossilized morphemes

A subset of ideophones contains fossilized formatives or infixes expressing intensity or more specific meaning.
as an ideophone with a descriptive function in (11c) where it is derived as an AV mi-
verb, together with the verbalizer sa-; (iii) finally, teraq is used as a noun in (11d).

(11)

a. Teraq teraq teraq teraq tera::q sa k-u remes.
ONOM ONOM:LENGT say NOM-NM blood
'drip drip drip drip dri::p went the blood.' (Pangangan.059)

b. Tera~teraq sa k-u urad i sera.
RDP~IDEO say NOM-NM rain LOC ground
'Splatter went the rain on the ground.'

c. Mi-sa-tera~teraq k-iyan u nanum.
AV-do-RDP~IDEO NOM-DEIC NM water
'The water was splattering.' (Age groups.052)

d. Si cacay a teraq n-u nanum.
EXS one LK IDEO.drop GEN-NM water
'There was one drop of water.'

Despite this flexible range of uses, *teraq* preserves its sensory and expressive properties even when used descriptively. This is precisely what distinguishes it from non-ideophonic lexemes such as *l(e)saq* ‘leak, drip’ or *tesiq* ‘drop, drip’, which denote a process without sound depicting usage and which may not be repeated like *t(e)raq* in (11a).

Table 1 summarizes these distinctions. Onomatopoeia in Column 1 are used holophrastically or as direct speech acts followed by the quotative verb *sa*. Ideophones in column 2 depict a sensory experience, and are followed by *sa* ‘say’, or *han* ‘do so’. Column 3 contains ideophones that can be used both depictively and descriptively, the latter as more grammatically integrated words, i.e., as derived and inflected verbs or nouns like other lexical roots, and which retain their ideophonic properties. On the other hand, column 4 is the point where ideophones have faded or lost ideophonic properties, are even more grammatically integrated, for instance with modifying use. These also favor semantic extension towards non-sensory and more abstract meanings.

2.3 Ideophones with fossilized morphemes

A subset of ideophones contains fossilized formatives or infixes expressing intensity or more specific meaning.
<table><caption>**Table 1:** Onomatopeia and ideophones.</caption><thead><tr><th>1<br>ONOMATOPEIAS</th><th>2<br>IDEOPHONES</th><th>3<br>IDEOPHONES<br>grammatically<br>integrated</th><th>4<br>DE-IDEOPHONIC WORDS</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>are ONLY performed,<br>or quoted by using <i>sa</i></td><td>express sensory<br>depiction, followed<br>by light verbs <i>sa</i> or<br><i>han</i></td><td>describe perception or<br>a sensory event</td><td>are descriptive, with<br>faded or lost ideophonic<br>properties</td></tr><tr><td>holophrastic</td><td>NO derivation and<br>MINOR grammatical<br>integration</td><td>undergo derivation,<br>grammatically<br>integrated as nouns,<br>verbs</td><td>highly grammatically<br>integrated, derived and<br>inflected as nouns,<br>verbs, modifiers</td></tr><tr><td>prosodic<br>foregrounding</td><td>prosodic<br>foregrounding</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>protracted sound,<br>repetition, expressive<br>lengthening</td><td>reduplication,<br>(repetition),<br>expressive<br>lengthening</td><td>expressive lengthening</td><td>expressive lengthening</td></tr><tr><td>polysemy</td><td>restricted polysemy</td><td>restricted polysemy</td><td>semantic extension<br>towards more abstract<br>meanings</td></tr></tbody></table>

### 2.3.1 Ideophones containing fossilized formatives

Some ideophones contain a formative occurring as an initial syllable before the root. For instance, *siw* depicts a hissing sound produced by the wind or by some fast motion, and *besiw* ≈ *bisiw*<fnref n="11" /> with the formative *be-* ≈ *bi-* have a similar meaning and preserve the characteristic pairing of form and sensory depiction; they may appear in compounds like *ta bisiw* in (12).

(12) Ta bisiw han a tangasa = tu i lumaq.

    go IDEO do COMP arrive = PFV LOC house

    ‘They went whiz straight back home.’ (Amis script.103)

<footnote n="11">¹¹ The symbol ≈ stands for alternate forms.</footnote>
<table><caption>**Table 1:** Onomatopeia and ideophones.</caption><thead><tr><th>1<br>ONOMATOPEIAS</th><th>2<br>IDEOPHONES</th><th>3<br>IDEOPHONES<br>grammatically<br>integrated</th><th>4<br>DE-IDEOPHONIC WORDS</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>are ONLY performed,<br>or quoted by using <i>sa</i></td><td>express sensory<br>depiction, followed<br>by light verbs <i>sa</i> or<br><i>han</i></td><td>describe perception or<br>a sensory event</td><td>are descriptive, with<br>faded or lost ideophonic<br>properties</td></tr><tr><td>holophrastic</td><td>NO derivation and<br>MINOR grammatical<br>integration</td><td>undergo derivation,<br>grammatically<br>integrated as nouns,<br>verbs</td><td>highly grammatically<br>integrated, derived and<br>inflected as nouns,<br>verbs, modifiers</td></tr><tr><td>prosodic<br>foregrounding</td><td>prosodic<br>foregrounding</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>protracted sound,<br>repetition, expressive<br>lengthening</td><td>reduplication,<br>(repetition),<br>expressive<br>lengthening</td><td>expressive lengthening</td><td>expressive lengthening</td></tr><tr><td>polysemy</td><td>restricted polysemy</td><td>restricted polysemy</td><td>semantic extension<br>towards more abstract<br>meanings</td></tr></tbody></table>

### 2.3.1 Ideophones containing fossilized formatives

Some ideophones contain a formative occurring as an initial syllable before the root. For instance, *siw* depicts a hissing sound produced by the wind or by some fast motion, and *besiw* ≈ *bisiw*<fnref n="11" /> with the formative *be-* ≈ *bi-* have a similar meaning and preserve the characteristic pairing of form and sensory depiction; they may appear in compounds like *ta bisiw* in (12).

(12) Ta bisiw han a tangasa = tu i lumaq.

    go IDEO do COMP arrive = PFV LOC house

    ‘They went whiz straight back home.’ (Amis script.103)

<footnote n="11">¹¹ The symbol ≈ stands for alternate forms.</footnote>
Another case is the fossilized formative *te-* ≈ *ti-* occurring on various ideophonic roots, for instance *kung* and *tekung*<fnref n="12" /> ‘banging sound’, *bek* ‘thud’ and *tibek* ‘pound (rice)’, *paqpaq* ‘slap, clap’ and *tepaq* ‘slap, swat, strike’; *mirmir* ‘shiver, shake’ and *temir* ‘throb, beat, thump’ (heart) as in (13). Importantly, words with these formatives have a broader meaning, associating *SOUND*, *GESTURE*, *VISION* and, in the case of *temir*, *INNER BODILY* perception.

(13)

a. *Mirmir sa k-u tireng.*
   *IDEO.shake say NOM-NM body*
   ‘Her body shivered.’ (Tatakulaq atu Hungti.0101)

b. *Mi-sa-temi~temir k-u balucuq = aku.*
   *AV-do-RDP~IDEO.throb NOM-NM heart=GEN.1SG*
   ‘My heart is thumping.’

### 2.3.2 Infixed ideophones

Another subset of ideophones displays reflexes of PAn infixes *<al>*, *<aR>*, *<aN>*, whose reflexes in Amis are *<al> ~ <ar>* and *<an>* .<fnref n="13" /> In Amis, *<ar> ~ <al>* express intensity, pluractionality and semelfactive actions, they mostly occur on reduplicated ideophonic CVC~CVC roots like *t<ar>uktuk* ‘beat, throb’, from *tuktuk* ‘sound of hitting, hammering, beating a drum’, which can also be used as a noun as in (14).

(14) *U t<ar>uktuk n-u balucuq.*
   *NM <INFX> IDEO GEN-NM heart*
   ‘The pulse/throbbing of the heart.’ (the knockknock of her heart)

In Puyuma (pyu; Formosan), a few similar forms are mentioned by Teng (2008: 36-37) as denoting the property of an object. In Saisiyat (xsy; Formosan), Zeitoun (2023)

<footnote n="12">¹² Reconstructed as PAn *tekūn₂* ‘bang; sound of a thud’ with a formative *te-* (Blust & Trussel, Austronesian comparative dictionary ongoing).</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³ Reid (1994: 330) hypothesizes the meaning of *<aR>* to be distributive or plural. Li & Tsuchida (2009: 359) suggest that *<aN>* might mean ‘having the sound or quality of’, as in Paiwan (pwn) and Puyuma (pyu; Formosan).</footnote>
Another case is the fossilized formative *te-* ≈ *ti-* occurring on various ideophonic roots, for instance *kung* and *tekung*<fnref n="12" /> ‘banging sound’, *bek* ‘thud’ and *tibek* ‘pound (rice)’, *paqpaq* ‘slap, clap’ and *tepaq* ‘slap, swat, strike’; *mirmir* ‘shiver, shake’ and *temir* ‘throb, beat, thump’ (heart) as in (13). Importantly, words with these formatives have a broader meaning, associating *SOUND*, *GESTURE*, *VISION* and, in the case of *temir*, *INNER BODILY* perception.

(13)

a. *Mirmir sa k-u tireng.*
   *IDEO.shake say NOM-NM body*
   ‘Her body shivered.’ (Tatakulaq atu Hungti.0101)

b. *Mi-sa-temi~temir k-u balucuq = aku.*
   *AV-do-RDP~IDEO.throb NOM-NM heart=GEN.1SG*
   ‘My heart is thumping.’

### 2.3.2 Infixed ideophones

Another subset of ideophones displays reflexes of PAn infixes *<al>*, *<aR>*, *<aN>*, whose reflexes in Amis are *<al> ~ <ar>* and *<an>* .<fnref n="13" /> In Amis, *<ar> ~ <al>* express intensity, pluractionality and semelfactive actions, they mostly occur on reduplicated ideophonic CVC~CVC roots like *t<ar>uktuk* ‘beat, throb’, from *tuktuk* ‘sound of hitting, hammering, beating a drum’, which can also be used as a noun as in (14).

(14) *U t<ar>uktuk n-u balucuq.*
   *NM <INFX> IDEO GEN-NM heart*
   ‘The pulse/throbbing of the heart.’ (the knockknock of her heart)

In Puyuma (pyu; Formosan), a few similar forms are mentioned by Teng (2008: 36-37) as denoting the property of an object. In Saisiyat (xsy; Formosan), Zeitoun (2023)

<footnote n="12">¹² Reconstructed as PAn *tekūn₂* ‘bang; sound of a thud’ with a formative *te-* (Blust & Trussel, Austronesian comparative dictionary ongoing).</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³ Reid (1994: 330) hypothesizes the meaning of *<aR>* to be distributive or plural. Li & Tsuchida (2009: 359) suggest that *<aN>* might mean ‘having the sound or quality of’, as in Paiwan (pwn) and Puyuma (pyu; Formosan).</footnote>
discusses fossilized infixed <al>, <ar> in onomatopoeic, sound denoting words. In Ilocano (Philippines), Rubino (2001: 310-311) mentions a similar <an> infix expressing intensity or the continuous aspect of an action, like *pirpir* 'flutter', *p<an> irpir* 'continual fluttering'; *pekpek* 'cram', *p<an> ekpek* 'resound' (of wood when hit). According to Rubino (2001: 314-315), the formerly productive infix <ar> occurs in "lexicalized items associated with the sound of the word" like *togtog* 'knock' and *t<ar> ogtog* 'repeated knocking'; *ng<ar> asngas* 'crunch'; *ng<ar> ebngeb* 'gnash one's teeth'; *ng<ar> etnget* 'gnaw', *b<ar> asabas* 'sound of heavy rain', *k<ar> apkap* 'grope in the dark'.

Northern Amis has around fifteen such infixed ideophonic forms, some of which are fossilized and no longer occur in their root form. Among them are *h<an> inghing* 'smell of toilets, of passing wind'; *k<ar> atkat* 'coarse, rough'; *k<al> aqkaq* 'rattling noise, speak like a machine gun' as in (15); *s<al> ucsuc* or *s<ar> ucsuc* 'fluent, fluid' which applies to liquids or figuratively to speech; *ng<al> iwngiw* 'mumble, grumble murmur' as in (16); *b<al> ambang* 'churning, chaotic movement' and its sound.

(15) Kalaqkaq k-ira taw.
IDEO NOM-DEIC person

'This person rattles like a machine gun.'

They are used with *sa* 'say' (16a), or derived as voice-affixed verbs as in (16b). Some of them may undergo metathesis, as in (16c). The non-ideophonic lexeme is *cihi* 'scold'.

(16)

a. Ngaliwngiw sa k-u wina.

IDEO say NOM-NM mother

'The mother mumbled to herself.' (Arikakay Dawa.025)

b. Ngaliwngiw-an n-i ina k-iya wawa.

IDEO-LV GEN-PN mother NOM-DEIC child

'The child was scolded by mother.'

c. Ngaliwngiw or langiwngiw 'mumble, murmur'.

Some infixed ideophones show semantic specialization, like *t<an> ektek* 'strong, steady, earnest', from *tektek* 'sound of hitting on wooden post'.
discusses fossilized infixed <al>, <ar> in onomatopoeic, sound denoting words. In Ilocano (Philippines), Rubino (2001: 310-311) mentions a similar <an> infix expressing intensity or the continuous aspect of an action, like *pirpir* 'flutter', *p<an> irpir* 'continual fluttering'; *pekpek* 'cram', *p<an> ekpek* 'resound' (of wood when hit). According to Rubino (2001: 314-315), the formerly productive infix <ar> occurs in "lexicalized items associated with the sound of the word" like *togtog* 'knock' and *t<ar> ogtog* 'repeated knocking'; *ng<ar> asngas* 'crunch'; *ng<ar> ebngeb* 'gnash one's teeth'; *ng<ar> etnget* 'gnaw', *b<ar> asabas* 'sound of heavy rain', *k<ar> apkap* 'grope in the dark'.

Northern Amis has around fifteen such infixed ideophonic forms, some of which are fossilized and no longer occur in their root form. Among them are *h<an> inghing* 'smell of toilets, of passing wind'; *k<ar> atkat* 'coarse, rough'; *k<al> aqkaq* 'rattling noise, speak like a machine gun' as in (15); *s<al> ucsuc* or *s<ar> ucsuc* 'fluent, fluid' which applies to liquids or figuratively to speech; *ng<al> iwngiw* 'mumble, grumble murmur' as in (16); *b<al> ambang* 'churning, chaotic movement' and its sound.

(15) Kalaqkaq k-ira taw.
IDEO NOM-DEIC person

'This person rattles like a machine gun.'

They are used with *sa* 'say' (16a), or derived as voice-affixed verbs as in (16b). Some of them may undergo metathesis, as in (16c). The non-ideophonic lexeme is *cihi* 'scold'.

(16)

a. Ngaliwngiw sa k-u wina.

IDEO say NOM-NM mother

'The mother mumbled to herself.' (Arikakay Dawa.025)

b. Ngaliwngiw-an n-i ina k-iya wawa.

IDEO-LV GEN-PN mother NOM-DEIC child

'The child was scolded by mother.'

c. Ngaliwngiw or langiwngiw 'mumble, murmur'.

Some infixed ideophones show semantic specialization, like *t<an> ektek* 'strong, steady, earnest', from *tektek* 'sound of hitting on wooden post'.
In some cases, the base form and the infixed form co-exist, for instance *beriw* that depicts the wind’s sound and motion, is the infixed form of *biw* ‘sound of wind’ (infixed as *b<ar>iw*, with the unstressed vowel weakened to /ə/). *Biw* is only depictive, while *beriw* has both functions, (i) depictive, followed by *sa* ‘say’ in (17a), possibly reduplicated as in (17b), or (ii) descriptive, when derived as *mi-sa-beriw* ‘to blow a breeze’ itself derivable as the participial modifier *mi-sa-beriw-ay* of *bali* ‘wind’ in (17c).

(17)

a. *Beri::w*<fnref n="14" /> *sa* = *tu* *k*-*u* *baliyus*.
*IDEO::LENGT* *say* = *PFV* *NOM-NM* *typhoon*
‘The typhoon went whoosh.’ (U surit nu Pangcah.189)

b. *B(e)ri~b(e)riw*<fnref n="15" /> *sa* *k*-*u* *bali*.
*RDP~IDEO* *say* *NOM-NM* *wind*
‘The wind went whizz whizz.’

c. *Saqpiq k-ina* [*mi-sa-b(e)ri~b(e)riw-ay a] *bali*.
*cool* *NOM-DEIC* *AV-do-RDP~IDEO-MODF* *LK* *wind*
‘This whiff of wind/breeze is cool.’

In all such cases, in their descriptive use, ideophones preserve their identifying pairing of form and sensory expression. Other cases of infixed ideophones are:

(18)

*c<al>ascas* or *ca<ar>ascas* ‘loud noise of water fall’, ‘loud noise of voices’ from *cas~cas* ‘ torrent, cascade’ and *cas* ‘sizzling sound’ (which is conceptualized as a related sound);

*k<al>ungkung* ‘loud sound’ (of thunder, of demolishing, etc.) from *kung~kung* ‘sound of knocking on (a door, drum)’;

*s<al>angsang* ‘loud noise of rain or water-fall’, from *sang* ‘pitter-patter, sound of rain’;

*t<ar>aktak* ‘sound of something falling one by one’ from *taktak* ‘sound of spilled, scattered object’.

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ Vowel lengthening expresses emphasis.</footnote>

<footnote n="15">¹⁵ Pronounced [b(ə)rib(ə)'riw].</footnote>
In some cases, the base form and the infixed form co-exist, for instance *beriw* that depicts the wind’s sound and motion, is the infixed form of *biw* ‘sound of wind’ (infixed as *b<ar>iw*, with the unstressed vowel weakened to /ə/). *Biw* is only depictive, while *beriw* has both functions, (i) depictive, followed by *sa* ‘say’ in (17a), possibly reduplicated as in (17b), or (ii) descriptive, when derived as *mi-sa-beriw* ‘to blow a breeze’ itself derivable as the participial modifier *mi-sa-beriw-ay* of *bali* ‘wind’ in (17c).

(17)

a. *Beri::w*<fnref n="14" /> *sa* = *tu* *k-u* *baliyus*.
*IDEO::LENGT* *say* = *PFV* *NOM-NM* *typhoon*
‘The typhoon went whoosh.’ (U surit nu Pangcah.189)

b. *B(e)ri~b(e)riw*<fnref n="15" /> *sa* *k-u* *bali*.
*RDP~IDEO* *say* *NOM-NM* *wind*
‘The wind went whizz whizz.’

c. *Saqpiq k-ina* [*mi-sa-b(e)ri~b(e)riw-ay a] *bali*.
*cool* *NOM-DEIC* *AV-do-RDP~IDEO-MODF* *LK* *wind*
‘This whiff of wind/breeze is cool.’

In all such cases, in their descriptive use, ideophones preserve their identifying pairing of form and sensory expression. Other cases of infixed ideophones are:

(18)

*c<al>ascas* or *ca<ar>ascas* ‘loud noise of water fall’, ‘loud noise of voices’ from *cas~cas* ‘ torrent, cascade’ and *cas* ‘sizzling sound’ (which is conceptualized as a related sound);

*k<al>ungkung* ‘loud sound’ (of thunder, of demolishing, etc.) from *kung~kung* ‘sound of knocking on (a door, drum)’;

*s<al>angsang* ‘loud noise of rain or water-fall’, from *sang* ‘pitter-patter, sound of rain’;

*t<ar>aktak* ‘sound of something falling one by one’ from *taktak* ‘sound of spilled, scattered object’.

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ Vowel lengthening expresses emphasis.</footnote>

<footnote n="15">¹⁵ Pronounced [b(ə)rib(ə)'riw].</footnote>
### 3. Ideophones with templatic features and sound symbolism

Since ideophones are symbolic representations of resemblances between linguistic form and sensory experiences, their iconicity is conventional, as is sound symbolism. Blust (1988: 57-58) pointed out “a high incidence of initial /k-/ or /g-/ in morphemes that refer to rubbing, scratching, scraping [..], and many initial /ŋ/ in words relating to the oral or nasal area”. Northern Amis has a fair number of lexemes with initial voiceless plosives /k, t, p/ for hitting, scratching, scraping sounds, sounds of thunder or guns; it has lexemes with initial /h/ which denote breathing, snoring, while those with initial /s/ denote hissing sounds. However, since these phonemes occur in non-ideophonic lexemes and without any clearly skewed ratio, investigation of this type of sound symbolism is not pursued. On the other hand, there are ideophonic<fnref n="16" /> sets identified by Blust (1988: 27, 38) as having a similar meaning and a specific syllabic template with consonant and vowel alternations denoting grades of intensity or pitch. Such Gestalt symbolism is inherent to ideophones since they depict a perceptual event, with reduplication used to express iterativity and “the vowel space to express grades of intensity between related forms” (Dingemanse 2012: 659, 663). Northern Amis has such sets of ideophones.

#### 3.1. Ideophonic sets, sound symbolism and their semantic effects

A few ideophonic sets vary by their initial consonants. One such case is $C_1iw$, in which the initial consonant can be labial *biw*, sibilant *siw*, fricative *hiw*. All of them depict a sound generally produced by some fast whirling or spinning movement connected to air or wind, like *biw*~*biw* depicting the sound of wind gusts, *hiwhiw* depicting a hissing breathing sound, *riwriw* depicting a spinning movement and its sound (like a spintop).

Others, approximately 35 of them, display vowel alternations and/or voiced vs. voiceless consonant alternation. They mostly express grades of intensity and related shades of meanings, like *kuris* ‘scratch, itch’ and *k(e)ris* ‘scratch, rub, rustle’, which refer to an action and connected sound.

(19) Sa-k(e)ris~k(e)ris k-u urad.
do-RDP~IDEO NOM-NM rain
‘The rain makes a drizzling sound.’

<footnote n="16">¹⁶ Blust (1988) calls them “onomatopoeic”.</footnote>
### 3. Ideophones with templatic features and sound symbolism

Since ideophones are symbolic representations of resemblances between linguistic form and sensory experiences, their iconicity is conventional, as is sound symbolism. Blust (1988: 57-58) pointed out “a high incidence of initial /k-/ or /g-/ in morphemes that refer to rubbing, scratching, scraping [...], and many initial /ŋ/ in words relating to the oral or nasal area”. Northern Amis has a fair number of lexemes with initial voiceless plosives /k, t, p/ for hitting, scratching, scraping sounds, sounds of thunder or guns; it has lexemes with initial /h/ which denote breathing, snoring, while those with initial /s/ denote hissing sounds. However, since these phonemes occur in non-ideophonic lexemes and without any clearly skewed ratio, investigation of this type of sound symbolism is not pursued. On the other hand, there are ideophonic<fnref n="16" /> sets identified by Blust (1988: 27, 38) as having a similar meaning and a specific syllabic template with consonant and vowel alternations denoting grades of intensity or pitch. Such Gestalt symbolism is inherent to ideophones since they depict a perceptual event, with reduplication used to express iterativity and “the vowel space to express grades of intensity between related forms” (Dingemanse 2012: 659, 663). Northern Amis has such sets of ideophones.

#### 3.1. Ideophonic sets, sound symbolism and their semantic effects

A few ideophonic sets vary by their initial consonants. One such case is $C_1iw$, in which the initial consonant can be labial *biw*, sibilant *siw*, fricative *hiw*. All of them depict a sound generally produced by some fast whirling or spinning movement connected to air or wind, like *biw*~*biw* depicting the sound of wind gusts, *hiwhiw* depicting a hissing breathing sound, *riwriw* depicting a spinning movement and its sound (like a spintop).

Others, approximately 35 of them, display vowel alternations and/or voiced vs. voiceless consonant alternation. They mostly express grades of intensity and related shades of meanings, like *kuris* ‘scratch, itch’ and *k(e)ris* ‘scratch, rub, rustle’, which refer to an action and connected sound.

(19) Sa-k(e)ris~k(e)ris k-u urad.
do-RDP~IDEO NOM-NM rain
‘The rain makes a drizzling sound.’

<footnote n="16">¹⁶ Blust (1988) calls them “onomatopoeic”.</footnote>
3.1.1 The semantic effects of vocalic alternations in ideophones

In his discussion of patterns of vowel alternations in Proto-Austronesian roots, Blust (2009: 357) states that “/a/ denotes loud, raucous sound, /ə/ muffled or blunted sound, /i/ a high-pitched sound and /u/ a loud or deep sound”.

In Amis by contrast, vowel alternations with high back vowel /u/ denote louder and
deeper sounds, while those with high front /i/ and central /ə/ vowels denote higher
pitch or sounds made by lighter objects. Among them are:

(20)

k(e)lung ‘sound of slammed door’ vs. k(e)le~k(e)leng ‘clap of thunder’ vs. k(e)ling<fnref n="17" />
‘sound of bell, clock, phone’;

kungkung 'sound of knocking' (on door, drum) vs. kingking 'ring, tinkle (like bells)';

pukpuk 'sound of husking (rice)' (in a container) vs. pikpik 'flapping sound' (of wings);

tuktuk 'sound of hitting' (door, wood, drum) vs. tektek 'sound of wooden post being hit' (into the ground) vs. tiktik 'sound of patting, tapping'.

Some associate sound and gestures like tuhtuh ‘empty & dump’ vs. tihtih ‘shake off, brush off’.

Vowels /a/, /i/, /ə/ also alternate as in (21), where some of these ideophones
associate GESTURES and VISUAL experience WITH or WITHOUT SOUND:

(21)

bahbah ‘expel, throw away’ vs. bihbih ‘shake off, brush off’;

cakcak ‘hoe, dig and loosen the soil’ vs. cekcek ‘squeeze, peck, press’ vs. cikcik
‘chop, slice’;

paqpaq ‘slap, clap, pat’ vs. piqpiq ‘press, tread’;

taptap ‘hit with an adze, pickaxe, chisel’ vs. teptep ‘chopping sound, sound of boat engine’;

tera~teraq ‘pitter-patter, sound of rain, of water’ vs. teri~teriq ‘tapping sound’ (lighter, as on a door).

<footnote n="17">¹⁷ The first syllable is a fossilized formative, the second one is reconstructed as PAn *lin ‘clear ringing sound’ (Blust 1988: 121).</footnote>
3.1.1 The semantic effects of vocalic alternations in ideophones

In his discussion of patterns of vowel alternations in Proto-Austronesian roots, Blust (2009: 357) states that “/a/ denotes loud, raucous sound, /ə/ muffled or blunted sound, /i/ a high-pitched sound and /u/ a loud or deep sound”.

In Amis by contrast, vowel alternations with high back vowel /u/ denote louder and
deeper sounds, while those with high front /i/ and central /ə/ vowels denote higher
pitch or sounds made by lighter objects. Among them are:

(20)

k(e)lung ‘sound of slammed door’ vs. k(e)le~k(e)leng ‘clap of thunder’ vs. k(e)ling<fnref n="17" />
‘sound of bell, clock, phone’;

kungkung 'sound of knocking' (on door, drum) vs. kingking 'ring, tinkle (like bells)';

pukpuk 'sound of husking (rice)' (in a container) vs. pikpik 'flapping sound' (of wings);

tuktuk 'sound of hitting' (door, wood, drum) vs. tektek 'sound of wooden post being hit' (into the ground) vs. tiktik 'sound of patting, tapping'.

Some associate sound and gestures like tuhtuh ‘empty & dump’ vs. tihtih ‘shake off, brush off’.

Vowels /a/, /i/, /ə/ also alternate as in (21), where some of these ideophones
associate GESTURES and VISUAL experience WITH or WITHOUT SOUND:

(21)

bahbah ‘expel, throw away’ vs. bihbih ‘shake off, brush off’;

cakcak ‘hoe, dig and loosen the soil’ vs. cekcek ‘squeeze, peck, press’ vs. cikcik
‘chop, slice’;

paqpaq ‘slap, clap, pat’ vs. piqpiq ‘press, tread’;

taptap ‘hit with an adze, pickaxe, chisel’ vs. teptep ‘chopping sound, sound of boat engine’;

tera~teraq ‘pitter-patter, sound of rain, of water’ vs. teri~teriq ‘tapping sound’ (lighter, as on a door).

<footnote n="17">¹⁷ The first syllable is a fossilized formative, the second one is reconstructed as PAn *lin ‘clear ringing sound’ (Blust 1988: 121).</footnote>
(22) Araw teri~teriq sa a tengil-an n-ira.
suddenly RDP~IDEO say COMP hear-LV GEN-3SG
'Suddenly, there was a knock knock that she heard.' (Chen 1969: 29)

### 3.1.2 The semantic effects of consonant gradation in ideophones

Consonant gradation is a prominent feature of ideophones in Austronesian languages. Blust (1988: 44) remarked that initial voiced stops "generally signal a louder or deeper sound in onomatopoetic roots than the homorganic voiceless stops" and that "voiced consonants signal larger sound-producing objects than their voiceless equivalents" (Blust 2009: 357). In contrast, voiceless stops in Northern Amis denote greater intensity.

- \#C- voiced vs. voiceless consonant gradation associating gesture and sound:
  pikpik 'flap (wings), flutter' vs. bikbik 'sway arms, shake';
  pihpih 'fan' vs. bihbih 'shake off, brush off';
  pekpek [pəkpək] 'pound, hammer' vs. bek [bək] 'thud'.

- Initial /k, t/ alternations:
  kelaq 'creak, rattle, clatter' vs. telaq 'clap, crackle'.

Some ideophones denoting sounds of hitting, scraping and scratching also have final consonant /t/, /s/, /h/ alternations, in addition to vowel alternations, like kutkut, kitkit 'scrape, scratch', kiskis 'scrape, scratch', kihkih 'scrape'. Final consonant alternation expressing intensity involves the velar /k/, the epiglottal <q> /ʔ/, the pharyngeal fricative /h/, such as tiktik 'pat (to extract)', tiqtiq [tiʔtiʔʰ] 'strike against something (hard)', tihtih 'shake off (dust), brush off'. All such ideophones are followed by sa 'say' and express related meanings with intensity gradation.

### 3.2. Ideophones with specific templates and skewed frequency

Bad smell and taste words also evidence phonesthemic properties with paired form-and-meaning occurring with a skewed frequency (Bergen 2004: 293). These words have specific templates with sequences of phonemes occurring as their first syllable, CanCVC for smells and Cah₂/l₂(e)CVC for tastes.

Amis speakers spontaneously identify and list them as forming a distinct set of expressive words for bad smells and tastes. This is in line with Bergen's remark (2004: 303-304)
(22) Araw teri~teriq sa a tengil-an n-ira.
suddenly RDP~IDEO say COMP hear-LV GEN-3SG
'Suddenly, there was a knock knock that she heard.' (Chen 1969: 29)

### 3.1.2 The semantic effects of consonant gradation in ideophones

Consonant gradation is a prominent feature of ideophones in Austronesian languages. Blust (1988: 44) remarked that initial voiced stops "generally signal a louder or deeper sound in onomatopoetic roots than the homorganic voiceless stops" and that "voiced consonants signal larger sound-producing objects than their voiceless equivalents" (Blust 2009: 357). In contrast, voiceless stops in Northern Amis denote greater intensity.

- \#C- voiced vs. voiceless consonant gradation associating gesture and sound:
  pikpik 'flap (wings), flutter' vs. bikbik 'sway arms, shake';
  pihpih 'fan' vs. bihbih 'shake off, brush off';
  pekpek [pəkpək] 'pound, hammer' vs. bek [bək] 'thud'.

- Initial /k, t/ alternations:
  kelaq 'creak, rattle, clatter' vs. telaq 'clap, crackle'.

Some ideophones denoting sounds of hitting, scraping and scratching also have final consonant /t/, /s/, /h/ alternations, in addition to vowel alternations, like kutkut, kitkit 'scrape, scratch', kiskis 'scrape, scratch', kihkih 'scrape'. Final consonant alternation expressing intensity involves the velar /k/, the epiglottal <q> /ʔ/, the pharyngeal fricative /h/, such as tiktik 'pat (to extract)', tiqtiq [tiʔtiʔʰ] 'strike against something (hard)', tihtih 'shake off (dust), brush off'. All such ideophones are followed by sa 'say' and express related meanings with intensity gradation.

### 3.2. Ideophones with specific templates and skewed frequency

Bad smell and taste words also evidence phonesthemic properties with paired form-and-meaning occurring with a skewed frequency (Bergen 2004: 293). These words have specific templates with sequences of phonemes occurring as their first syllable, CanCVC for smells and Cah₂/l₂(e)CVC for tastes.

Amis speakers spontaneously identify and list them as forming a distinct set of expressive words for bad smells and tastes. This is in line with Bergen's remark (2004: 303-304)
that language users internalize recurrent form-meaning correlations, “such generalizations over individual tokens are based not on compositionality or productivity, but rather on the simple recurrence in the language of a form-meaning association”.

Their restricted number, the fact that words with such semantics are in great majority (up to 80%) words with such template, and the fact that no other words share this pattern, with one or two exceptions, identify them as ideophones of a distinct type. The reason for this template could be the presence of a now unanalyzable semantic or ideophonic formative. However, there are differences between them, bad smell ideophones having depictive and descriptive functions, while taste words tend to lose their depictive function.

### 3.2.1 Smell ideophones

Many of the ideophones expressing stench and bad smells are reconstructed in PAn with the pattern *(C)an(e)CV(C) (Blust 1988: 58-60). They have reflexes in several Formosan and in other western Austronesian languages.<fnref n="18" />

There are fifteen such words in Northern Amis, nine of them with initial glottal stop like ?angcep ‘smell of burnt (rice, food)’, three of them with initial /b/. These words make up the great majority (75%) of smell words in my lexical database (see Table 2 below, and Table 6 in the Appendix). Only five other non-ideophonic words referring to smells do not follow this pattern, one of them is ?ahteng ‘smell of faeces, of rotten meat’, another is the generic word sanek ‘odour, smell’.

<table><caption>**Table 2:** Bad smell ideophones in Amis.</caption><thead><tr><th>ʔanCVC template</th><th>banCVC template</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>ʔangcep 'smell of burnt (rice, food)'</td><td>bangruh 'smell of rotten food'</td></tr><tr><td>ʔangcuh 'smell of urine'</td><td>banglih 'bad smell of grass, tree'</td></tr><tr><td>ʔanglih 'smell of cut grass'</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ʔanglis 'smell of fish'</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ʔangliw 'smell or taste of rotting food'</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ʔangsit 'smell of animal or dirty person'</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ʔangsaw 'smell of fire smoke'</td><td>bangsit 'stench of urine'</td></tr><tr><td>ʔangtir 'smell of sweat or of women's periods'</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ʔangtul 'stinky'</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote n="18">¹⁸ In Puyuma (pyu), Paiwan (pwn) both Formosan, and in Philippine languages (Blust 1988: 60).</footnote>
that language users internalize recurrent form-meaning correlations, “such generalizations over individual tokens are based not on compositionality or productivity, but rather on the simple recurrence in the language of a form-meaning association”.

Their restricted number, the fact that words with such semantics are in great majority (up to 80%) words with such template, and the fact that no other words share this pattern, with one or two exceptions, identify them as ideophones of a distinct type. The reason for this template could be the presence of a now unanalyzable semantic or ideophonic formative. However, there are differences between them, bad smell ideophones having depictive and descriptive functions, while taste words tend to lose their depictive function.

### 3.2.1 Smell ideophones

Many of the ideophones expressing stench and bad smells are reconstructed in PAn with the pattern *(C)an(e)CV(C) (Blust 1988: 58-60). They have reflexes in several Formosan and in other western Austronesian languages.<fnref n="18" />

There are fifteen such words in Northern Amis, nine of them with initial glottal stop like ?angcep ‘smell of burnt (rice, food)’, three of them with initial /b/. These words make up the great majority (75%) of smell words in my lexical database (see Table 2 below, and Table 6 in the Appendix). Only five other non-ideophonic words referring to smells do not follow this pattern, one of them is ?ahteng ‘smell of faeces, of rotten meat’, another is the generic word sanek ‘odour, smell’.

<table><caption>**Table 2:** Bad smell ideophones in Amis.</caption><thead><tr><th>ʔanCVC template</th><th>banCVC template</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>ʔangcep 'smell of burnt (rice, food)'</td><td>bangruh 'smell of rotten food'</td></tr><tr><td>ʔangcuh 'smell of urine'</td><td>banglih 'bad smell of grass, tree'</td></tr><tr><td>ʔanglih 'smell of cut grass'</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ʔanglis 'smell of fish'</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ʔangliw 'smell or taste of rotting food'</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ʔangsit 'smell of animal or dirty person'</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ʔangsaw 'smell of fire smoke'</td><td>bangsit 'stench of urine'</td></tr><tr><td>ʔangtir 'smell of sweat or of women's periods'</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ʔangtul 'stinky'</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote n="18">¹⁸ In Puyuma (pyu), Paiwan (pwn) both Formosan, and in Philippine languages (Blust 1988: 60).</footnote>
When depictive, smell ideophones are followed by *sa* ‘say’ (23a); when used descriptively, they behave like stative predicates, and can be derived as modifiers (23b). They are gradable, and may be derived as attenuative predicates with the reduplicated CVC~root-*an* pattern (23c-d). When negated, they contradict or express disagreement with a previous statement.

(23)

a. ?angtul *sa a sanek-an.*
stinky say COMP smell-LV
'It is stinky to smell!' (Kakunas.021)

b. ?angtul-ay *a ka-ka?en-en k-inian.*
stinky-MODF LK NFIN-eat-UV NOM-DEIC
'This is stinky food.' (U misamaraday.010)

c. ?ang~?angtul-an.<fnref n="19" />
CVC.RDP~stinky-AN
'It was a little smelly.'

d. ?ang~?angcep-an.
CVC.RDP~smell.burnt-AN
'It slightly smelt of (something) burnt.'

### 3.2.2 Taste words

Tastes words are an even smaller set of words (fewer than ten), with a $Cah_2/l_2$ (e)CVC template and /h/ or /l/ as $C_2$, like ?ahbed 'chewy', ?ahcid 'salty', ?alsuq 'tasty', ?al(e)ngel 'bitter', ?al(e)dah 'spicy'. They make up 81% of all attested taste words, with only two other words having a different pattern, in addition to the generic verb tanam 'taste'. They are used to depict a personal experience, followed by *sa* as in (24a). They can be derived as inchoative verbs expressing a change of state as in (24b), and they can be negated to express disagreement, as in (24c).

(24)

a. ?ahbed *sa k-ina titi.*
chewy say NOM-DEIC meat
'This meat is chewy.'

<footnote n="19">¹⁹The suffix -AN in the attenuative CVC~root-*an* construction is homophonous with LV -an.</footnote>
When depictive, smell ideophones are followed by *sa* ‘say’ (23a); when used descriptively, they behave like stative predicates, and can be derived as modifiers (23b). They are gradable, and may be derived as attenuative predicates with the reduplicated CVC~root-*an* pattern (23c-d). When negated, they contradict or express disagreement with a previous statement.

(23)

a. ?angtul *sa a sanek-an.*
stinky say COMP smell-LV
'It is stinky to smell!' (Kakunas.021)

b. ?angtul-ay *a ka-kaʔen-en k-inian.*
stinky-MODF LK NFIN-eat-UV NOM-DEIC
'This is stinky food.' (U misamaraday.010)

c. ?ang~?angtul-an.<fnref n="19" />
CVC.RDP~stinky-AN
'It was a little smelly.'

d. ?ang~?angcep-an.
CVC.RDP~smell.burnt-AN
'It slightly smelt of (something) burnt.'

### 3.2.2 Taste words

Tastes words are an even smaller set of words (fewer than ten), with a $Cah_2/l_2$ (e)CVC template and /h/ or /l/ as $C_2$, like ?ahbed ‘chewy’, ?ahcid ‘salty’, ?alsuq ‘tasty’, ?al(e)ngel ‘bitter’, ?al(e)dah ‘spicy’. They make up 81% of all attested taste words, with only two other words having a different pattern, in addition to the generic verb tanam ‘taste’. They are used to depict a personal experience, followed by *sa* as in (24a). They can be derived as inchoative verbs expressing a change of state as in (24b), and they can be negated to express disagreement, as in (24c).

(24)

a. ?ahbed *sa k-ina titi.*
chewy say NOM-DEIC meat
'This meat is chewy.'

<footnote n="19">¹⁹The suffix -AN in the attenuative CVC~root-*an* construction is homophonous with LV -an.</footnote>
b. Mala-ʔahbed = tu k-ina titi, tada ma-tenes k-isu
INCH-chewy = COS NOM-DEIC meat INTENS NAV-be.long NOM-2SG
a mi-cacak.
COMP AV-cook

‘The meat has become chewy, you cooked it too long.’

c. Caay ka-ʔahbed.
NEG NFIN-chewy
‘(They) are not chewy.’ (Katacumuli.013)

Like bad smell words, they can be derived as modifiers as in (25a); they are gradable and derived as attenuative predicates (25b); they may also denote a caused change of state (25c-d).

(25)

a. ʔaldah-ay a nanum.
spicy-MODF LK water
‘alcohol’ (lit. spicy liquid/water)

b. ʔal(e)~al(e)dah-an k-ina sinabel.
CVC.RDP~spicy-AN NOM-DEIC dish
‘This dish is a little spicy.’

c. Pa-ka-ʔaldah cira t-u sinabel.
CAUS-NFIN-spicy NOM.3SG OBL-NM dish
‘(s)he made the dish spicy.’

d. Pa-ʔahcid k-u cilaq t-u kabi.
CAUS-salty NOM-DEIC salt OBL-NM soup
‘The salt has made the soup (too) salty.’ (Chen 1987: 260)

The taste word ʔalsuq ‘tasty’ (26a) also extends to music or songs as pleasant auditory experiences as in (26b).

(26)

a. ʔalsuq-ay a ka-kaʔen-en.
tasty-MODF LK NFIN-eat-UV
‘(they are) delicacies (lit. it’s tasty to be eaten).’
b. Mala-ʔahbed = tu k-ina titi, tada ma-tenes k-isu
INCH-chewy = COS NOM-DEIC meat INTENS NAV-be.long NOM-2SG
a mi-cacak.
COMP AV-cook

‘The meat has become chewy, you cooked it too long.’

c. Caay ka-ʔahbed.
NEG NFIN-chewy
‘(They) are not chewy.’ (Katacumuli.013)

Like bad smell words, they can be derived as modifiers as in (25a); they are gradable and derived as attenuative predicates (25b); they may also denote a caused change of state (25c-d).

(25)

a. ʔaldah-ay a nanum.
spicy-MODF LK water
‘alcohol’ (lit. spicy liquid/water)

b. ʔal(e)~al(e)dah-an k-ina sinabel.
CVC.RDP~spicy-AN NOM-DEIC dish
‘This dish is a little spicy.’

c. Pa-ka-ʔaldah cira t-u sinabel.
CAUS-NFIN-spicy NOM.3SG OBL-NM dish
‘(s)he made the dish spicy.’

d. Pa-ʔahcid k-u cilaq t-u kabi.
CAUS-salty NOM-DEIC salt OBL-NM soup
‘The salt has made the soup (too) salty.’ (Chen 1987: 260)

The taste word ʔalsuq ‘tasty’ (26a) also extends to music or songs as pleasant auditory experiences as in (26b).

(26)

a. ʔalsuq-ay a ka-kaʔen-en.
tasty-MODF LK NFIN-eat-UV
‘(they are) delicacies (lit. it’s tasty to be eaten).’
b. ?alsuq a tengil-an k-u radiw n-ira.
    pleasant COMP listen-LV NOM-NM song GEN-3SG
    ‘Her song is beautiful to listen to.’

To summarize, the words for bad smells and tastes make up a very small subset of the lexicon with their own specific templates and highly skewed distribution that identify them as a distinct set of expressive words. However, taste words are mostly used descriptively and are more frequently de-ideophonized than smell words.

## 4. The depictive vs. descriptive use of ideophones

Amis is not unique in having descriptively used ideophones. Dingemanse (2017: 376-380), Dingemanse & Akita (2017: 6-7) and Akita (2017: 316) point out similar facts in various languages in Africa, Eurasia, Australia, North and South America. They point out an inverse correlation between expressiveness and grammatical integration, also observed cross-linguistically. Akita (2017: 317, 323) proposes the following scale of morphosyntactic integration of Japanese (jpn) ideophones:

acategorial < quotative-adverbial < bare-adverbial < verbal < nominal
NON-INTEGRATED INTEGRATED

In Amis, ideophones also evidence this inverse correlation. Even when derived, they retain a close semantic relation with sensory features, as shown by the fact that the same ideophone can often be used depictively or descriptively (columns 2 and 3 of Table 1).

Dingemanse (2023: 9, preprint) mentions that in Ewe (ewe; Ameka 2001) and Basque (eus; Ibarretxe-Antuñano 2017), ideophones are multicategorial with predicative and attributive uses, while remaining mostly free of inflectional or derivational morphology.

### 4.1. The descriptive usage and grammatical integration of ideophones

In Amis, ideophones occur under their base or reduplicated form, followed by *sa* ‘say’ as in (27a) or by *han* ‘do so’ when used depictively, some of them can also be derived and inflected as verbs, nouns or modifiers, in which case they describe a sensory event in an expressive way. For instance, the ideophone in (27b) is derived as a sound
b. ?alsuq a tengil-an k-u radiw n-ira.
    pleasant COMP listen-LV NOM-NM song GEN-3SG
    ‘Her song is beautiful to listen to.’

To summarize, the words for bad smells and tastes make up a very small subset of the lexicon with their own specific templates and highly skewed distribution that identify them as a distinct set of expressive words. However, taste words are mostly used descriptively and are more frequently de-ideophonized than smell words.

## 4. The depictive vs. descriptive use of ideophones

Amis is not unique in having descriptively used ideophones. Dingemanse (2017: 376-380), Dingemanse & Akita (2017: 6-7) and Akita (2017: 316) point out similar facts in various languages in Africa, Eurasia, Australia, North and South America. They point out an inverse correlation between expressiveness and grammatical integration, also observed cross-linguistically. Akita (2017: 317, 323) proposes the following scale of morphosyntactic integration of Japanese (jpn) ideophones:

acategorial < quotative-adverbial < bare-adverbial < verbal < nominal
NON-INTEGRATED INTEGRATED

In Amis, ideophones also evidence this inverse correlation. Even when derived, they retain a close semantic relation with sensory features, as shown by the fact that the same ideophone can often be used depictively or descriptively (columns 2 and 3 of Table 1).

Dingemanse (2023: 9, preprint) mentions that in Ewe (ewe; Ameka 2001) and Basque (eus; Ibarretxe-Antuñano 2017), ideophones are multicategorial with predicative and attributive uses, while remaining mostly free of inflectional or derivational morphology.

### 4.1. The descriptive usage and grammatical integration of ideophones

In Amis, ideophones occur under their base or reduplicated form, followed by *sa* ‘say’ as in (27a) or by *han* ‘do so’ when used depictively, some of them can also be derived and inflected as verbs, nouns or modifiers, in which case they describe a sensory event in an expressive way. For instance, the ideophone in (27b) is derived as a sound
denoting verb in locative voice, a voice that is typically used for natural phenomena and weather events. Compare with the non-ideophonic lexeme *betiliq* ‘thunder’, also derived as a verb *betiliq-an* in (27c).

(27)

a. *Kele~keleng sa k-u betiliq.*
   RDP~IDEO say NOM-NM thunder
   ‘The thunder is rumbling.’

b. *Kele~keleng-an.*
   RDP~IDEO-LV
   ‘It’s rumbling.’

c. *Betiliq-an anini.*
   thunder-LV now
   ‘It’s thundering now.’

Ideophones derived as voice-affixed verbs describe a sensory event in an expressive way, possibly conveying a personal reaction to that event, a property lacking in non-ideophonic lexemes with similar meanings. Ideophones have a variable potential for derivation and inflection as verbs, modifiers and nouns. However, such grammatical integration does not necessarily correlate with lost ideophonic status, as long as they retain some expressive sensory features of their original depictive function. Though ideophones in descriptive use mostly occur in affirmative constructions, some of them may be negated. This is not specific to Amis, as various other languages allow ideophones to be negated, like Japanese or Hausa (hau; Dingemanse 2017: 364; 2023, preprint pp. 9-10).

For instance, the ideophone *kelaq* is depictive in (28a); it is derived and inflected as a sound denoting verb in the prohibitive mood in (28b), and in (28c) it is used as a noun referring to a ‘wooden tipcart’ producing that sound.

(28)

a. *Kelaq! sa.*
   IDEO say
   ‘It went “crack”!’ (Cabay aku.00085)

b. *Aka pi-sa-kela~kelaq!*
   PROH NFIN-do-RDP~IDEO
   ‘Don’t make clattering noise!’ (don’t clomp clomp with your clogs)
   (Chen stories 1969: 26)
denoting verb in locative voice, a voice that is typically used for natural phenomena and weather events. Compare with the non-ideophonic lexeme *betiliq* ‘thunder’, also derived as a verb *betiliq-an* in (27c).

(27)

a. *Kele~keleng sa k-u betiliq.*
   RDP~IDEO say NOM-NM thunder
   ‘The thunder is rumbling.’

b. *Kele~keleng-an.*
   RDP~IDEO-LV
   ‘It’s rumbling.’

c. *Betiliq-an anini.*
   thunder-LV now
   ‘It’s thundering now.’

Ideophones derived as voice-affixed verbs describe a sensory event in an expressive way, possibly conveying a personal reaction to that event, a property lacking in non-ideophonic lexemes with similar meanings. Ideophones have a variable potential for derivation and inflection as verbs, modifiers and nouns. However, such grammatical integration does not necessarily correlate with lost ideophonic status, as long as they retain some expressive sensory features of their original depictive function. Though ideophones in descriptive use mostly occur in affirmative constructions, some of them may be negated. This is not specific to Amis, as various other languages allow ideophones to be negated, like Japanese or Hausa (hau; Dingemanse 2017: 364; 2023, preprint pp. 9-10).

For instance, the ideophone *kelaq* is depictive in (28a); it is derived and inflected as a sound denoting verb in the prohibitive mood in (28b), and in (28c) it is used as a noun referring to a ‘wooden tipcart’ producing that sound.

(28)

a. *Kelaq! sa.*
   IDEO say
   ‘It went “crack”!’ (Cabay aku.00085)

b. *Aka pi-sa-kela~kelaq!*
   PROH NFIN-do-RDP~IDEO
   ‘Don’t make clattering noise!’ (don’t clomp clomp with your clogs)
   (Chen stories 1969: 26)
c. U muli n-u kela~kelaq.

NM wheel GEN-NM RDP~IDEO tipcart

‘The wheels of the rattling tipcart.’

The ideophone *t(e)la~t(e)laq* depicts various related sounds, rifle shots, firecrackers as in (29a), clapping. In (29b), it is a derived verb in Actor Voice *mi-sa-t(e)lat(e)laq*; in (29c), it is derived as a verb in Locative Voice *tela~telaq-an*, and in (29d), it is a deverbal noun *ni-pi-tela~telaq* ‘clapping’. On the other hand, non-ideophonic lexemes *bakuhac* ‘explore’, *kemiq* ‘shoot’ or *telik* ‘explore like firecracker, glitter’ have no depictive use.

(29)

a. Tela~telaq sa k-u pangpawa.

RDP~IDEO say NOM-NM ONOM.firecracker

‘The firecrackers went crackle crackle.’

b. Mi-sa-tela~telaq k-u pangpawa.

AV-do-RDP~IDEO NOM-NM ONOM.firecracker

‘The firecrackers are crackling.’

c. Kapah k-u radiw n-ira,

good NOM-NM song GEN-3SG

‘Her song was nice,

manay tela~telaq-an n-u alumunay.

so RDP~IDEO-LV GEN-NM people

so people clapped (for her).’

d. Ma-tiya u betiliq k-u ni-pi-tela~telaq<fnref n="20" />

NAV-be. like NM thunder NOM-NM PFV.NMZ-NFIN-RDP~IDEO

n-u alumanay.

GEN-NM people

‘The clapping of the people sounded like thunder.’ (Age groups.197)

The grammatical integration of ideophones does not necessarily incur loss of their
sensory features as shown by *kelaq* in (28), *t(e)la~t(e)laq* in (29) and by *tektek* in (30).

<footnote n="20">²⁰AV mi-t(e)la~t(e)laq is nominalized by the perfective NMZ ni-, together with the non-finite pi- form.</footnote>
c. **U muli n-u kela~kelaq.**

NM wheel GEN-NM RDP~IDEO tipcart

‘The wheels of the rattling tipcart.’

The ideophone *t(e)la~t(e)laq* depicts various related sounds, rifle shots, firecrackers as in (29a), clapping. In (29b), it is a derived verb in Actor Voice *mi-sa-t(e)lat(e)laq*; in (29c), it is derived as a verb in Locative Voice *tela~telaq-an*, and in (29d), it is a deverbal noun *ni-pi-tela~telaq* ‘clapping’. On the other hand, non-ideophonic lexemes *bakuhac* ‘explore’, *kemiq* ‘shoot’ or *telik* ‘explore like firecracker, glitter’ have no depictive use.

(29)

a. **Tela~telaq sa k-u pangpawa.**

RDP~IDEO say NOM-NM ONOM.firecracker

‘The firecrackers went crackle crackle.’

b. **Mi-sa-tela~telaq k-u pangpawa.**

AV-do-RDP~IDEO NOM-NM ONOM.firecracker

‘The firecrackers are crackling.’

c. **Kapah k-u radiw n-ira,**

good NOM-NM song GEN-3SG

‘Her song was nice,

manay tela~telaq-an n-u alumunay.

so RDP~IDEO-LV GEN-NM people

so people clapped (for her).’

d. **Ma-tiya u betiliq k-u ni-pi-tela~telaq<fnref n="20" />**

NAV-be. like NM thunder NOM-NM PFV.NMZ-NFIN-RDP~IDEO

n-u alumanay.

GEN-NM people

‘The clapping of the people sounded like thunder.’ (Age groups.197)

The grammatical integration of ideophones does not necessarily incur loss of their
sensory features as shown by *kelaq* in (28), *t(e)la~t(e)laq* in (29) and by *tektek* in (30).

<footnote n="20">²⁰AV mi-t(e)la~t(e)laq is nominalized by the perfective NMZ ni-, together with the non-finite pi- form.</footnote>
In (30a), *tektek* depicts the sound of hitting on wooden posts, while in (30b), it is derived as a causative verb inflected for hortative mood and used descriptively.

(30)

a. *Tektek* *sa k-u suni n-iya kilang a mi-rangat.*

IDEO say NM-NM sound GEN-DEIC wood COMP AV-fence

‘Tektek goes the sound of the wood as (he) makes a fence.’

b. *Pa-tektek-a k-ita a mi-rangat.*

CAUS-IDEO-HORT NOM-1PL.INCL COMP AV-fence

‘Let’s hit the sticks (into the ground) to make a fence.’

*Bengbeng* depicts a banging sound in (31a), while in (31b), it describes a sound caused by pelting stones. The corresponding non-ideophonic verb is *mi-alud* ‘throw stones, lapidate’.

(31)

a. *Bengbeng* *sa k-u suni n-ira panan.*

IDEO say NOM-NM sound GEN-DEIC door

‘Bangbang went the sound of the door.’

b. *Pa-bengbeng k-uhni t-u bek(e)loh.*

CAUS-IDEO NOM-3PL OBL-NM stone

‘They banged (it) with stones.’

The ideophone *bek* depicts a dull sound or thud in (32a), while in (32b), it is marked by the conveyance voice affix *si-* indicating a change of location of the patient pivot and describes a sound caused by hurling a frog (the patient being unexpressed).

(32)

a. *Bek* *sa k-u bek(e)loh a ma-terak.*

IDEO say NOM-NM stone COMP NAV-fall

‘The stone went thud when it fell.’

b. *Si-pa-bek han=tu itira i tebun.*

CV-CAUS-IDEO do.so=PFV there LOC well

‘(It) was made to go thud there onto the well.’ (Tatakulaq atu Hungti (2).0126)
In (30a), *tektek* depicts the sound of hitting on wooden posts, while in (30b), it is derived as a causative verb inflected for hortative mood and used descriptively.

(30)

a. Tektek sa k-u suni n-iya kilang a mi-rangat.

IDEO say NM-NM sound GEN-DEIC wood COMP AV-fence

‘Tektek goes the sound of the wood as (he) makes a fence.’

b. Pa-tektek-a k-ita a mi-rangat.

CAUS-IDEO-HORT NOM-1PL.INCL COMP AV-fence

‘Let’s hit the sticks (into the ground) to make a fence.’

*Bengbeng* depicts a banging sound in (31a), while in (31b), it describes a sound caused by pelting stones. The corresponding non-ideophonic verb is *mi-alud* ‘throw stones, lapidate’.

(31)

a. Bengbeng sa k-u suni n-ira panan.

IDEO say NOM-NM sound GEN-DEIC door

‘Bangbang went the sound of the door.’

b. Pa-bengbeng k-uhni t-u bek(e)loh.

CAUS-IDEO NOM-3PL OBL-NM stone

‘They banged (it) with stones.’

The ideophone *bek* depicts a dull sound or thud in (32a), while in (32b), it is marked by the conveyance voice affix *si-* indicating a change of location of the patient pivot and describes a sound caused by hurling a frog (the patient being unexpressed).

(32)

a. Bek sa k-u bek(e)loh a ma-terak.

IDEO say NOM-NM stone COMP NAV-fall

‘The stone went thud when it fell.’

b. Si-pa-bek han=tu itira i tebun.

CV-CAUS-IDEO do.so=PFV there LOC well

‘(It) was made to go thud there onto the well.’ (Tatakulaq atu Hungti (2).0126)
Tekiq followed by *sa* in (33a) depicts striking, hitting sounds, while in (33b), it is derived as a noun marked as the nominative argument *k-u teki~tekiq* of the negative existential verb *awaay* and used descriptively. In (33c), it is a deverbal noun derived from the voice-affixed verb *mi-sa-teki~tekiq* ‘make a clanking noise’, which refers to noises made by human beings, and metaphorically to life.

(33)

a. *Tekiq sa i walu-w-ay k-u tuki.*

*IDEO say LOC eight-ep-MODF NOM-NM clock*

‘Cling went the clock at 8.’

b. *Awaay k-u teki~tekiq n-ina niyaruq.*

*NEG.EXS NOM-NM RDP~IDEO GEN-DEIC village*

‘There was no clank clank sound in the village.’ (i.e., no sound of life)

c. *Awaay = tu a maka-tengil k-aku t-u*

*NEG.EXS = PFV COMP ABILT-hear NOM-1SG OBL-NM*

*pi-sa-teki~tekiq n-ira.*

*NFIN-do-RDP~IDEO GEN-3SG*

‘I would no longer hear any clanking (sound) of his.’ (i.e., he is deceased)

(Cabay aku.00167)

On the other hand, non-ideophonic verbs like *palu* ‘strike with a stick’ and *mukun* ‘to hammer’ only describe actions. Another difference is that instrument nouns can be derived from action verbs by the dedicated prefix *sa-*, like *sa-mukun* ‘a hammer’, while sound-depicting ideophones are not derived as sound producing instruments by *sa-*. Some occur under their base form, like *tibtib* ‘vibrate, jew’s harp” (lit. vibrator); others are derived as locative nouns by *Ca~root-an* reduplication as shown in Table 3, like *ta-tuktuk-an* ‘drum’ (lit. place where to beat) or *ka-kingking-an* ‘bell’.

This sample of ideophones shows that their expressive sensory features are retained even when used descriptively. The inverse correlation between expressiveness and grammatical integration of ideophones thus occurs as a continuum, rather than as bipolar features.
Tekiq followed by *sa* in (33a) depicts striking, hitting sounds, while in (33b), it is derived as a noun marked as the nominative argument *k-u teki~tekiq* of the negative existential verb *awaay* and used descriptively. In (33c), it is a deverbal noun derived from the voice-affixed verb *mi-sa-teki~tekiq* ‘make a clanking noise’, which refers to noises made by human beings, and metaphorically to life.

(33)

a. *Tekiq sa i walu-w-ay k-u tuki.*

*IDEO say LOC eight-ep-MODF NOM-NM clock*

‘Cling went the clock at 8.’

b. *Awaay k-u teki~tekiq n-ina niyaruq.*

*NEG.EXS NOM-NM RDP~IDEO GEN-DEIC village*

‘There was no clank clank sound in the village.’ (i.e., no sound of life)

c. *Awaay = tu a maka-tengil k-aku t-u*

*NEG.EXS = PFV COMP ABILT-hear NOM-1SG OBL-NM*

*pi-sa-teki~tekiq n-ira.*

*NFIN-do-RDP~IDEO GEN-3SG*

‘I would no longer hear any clanking (sound) of his.’ (i.e., he is deceased)

(Cabay aku.00167)

On the other hand, non-ideophonic verbs like *palu* ‘strike with a stick’ and *mukun* ‘to hammer’ only describe actions. Another difference is that instrument nouns can be derived from action verbs by the dedicated prefix *sa-*, like *sa-mukun* ‘a hammer’, while sound-depicting ideophones are not derived as sound producing instruments by *sa-*. Some occur under their base form, like *tibtib* ‘vibrate, jew’s harp” (lit. vibrator); others are derived as locative nouns by *Ca~root-an* reduplication as shown in Table 3, like *ta-tuktuk-an* ‘drum’ (lit. place where to beat) or *ka-kingking-an* ‘bell’.

This sample of ideophones shows that their expressive sensory features are retained even when used descriptively. The inverse correlation between expressiveness and grammatical integration of ideophones thus occurs as a continuum, rather than as bipolar features.
Most ideophones are used as verbs and only about 10% are also used as nouns,<fnref n="21" /> in contrast with all other lexical roots which do not show any such categorical restriction in Amis. Instances of ideophones used as nouns by zero derivation are *teki*~*tekiq* ‘clanking sound’ in (33b), *teraq* ‘a drop’ in example (11c), *badambang* ‘stormy weather, a mess’. They sometimes depict the *SOURCE* of the sound, for instance, *ciwciw* ‘peep peep’ also means ‘a chick, a duckling’.

<table><caption>**Table 3:** Some derivational processes of ideophones.</caption><thead><tr><th>IDEOPHONE</th><th>DERIVED IDEOPHONIC VERB<br>(DESCRIPTIVE USE)</th><th>DERIVED NOUN<br>by Ca~reduplication-an<fnref n="22" /></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>cikcik 'sound of chopping'</td><td>mi-cikcik 'slice, chop'</td><td>ca-cikcik-an 'chopping board'</td></tr><tr><td>tuktuk 'sound of hitting'</td><td>mi-tuktuk 'beat'<br>mi-sa-tuktuk 'beat the drum'</td><td>ta-tuktuk-an 'drum'</td></tr><tr><td>kingking 'sound of ringing,<br>clink, tinkle'</td><td>mi-kingking 'ring, make a tinkling<br>sound'</td><td>ka-kingking-an 'bell'</td></tr></tbody></table>

The word *cas*, which depicts a sizzling sound, followed by *sa* as in (34a), also appears under its reduplicated form *cas*~*cas* to depict the sound of splashing water or the source of that sound, a ‘splattering waterfall’ (34b); in (34c), it is derived as a verb ‘splatter like a waterfall’ and used descriptively.

(34)

a. Ca::s sa=tu k-u dangah n-umita.

IDEO.LENGT say=PFV NOM-NM pot GEN-1PL.INCL

‘Sizzle goes the cooking-pot.’ (Katacumuli.041)

b. Ma-tengil=aku k-u suni n-u cas~cas.

UV-hear=GEN.3SG NOM-NM sound GEN-NM RDP~IDEO.cascade

‘I can hear the sound of the cascade.’

c. Ma-sa-cas~cas k-ina nanum.

NAV-do-RDP~IDEO NOM-NM water

‘The water is splattering like a cascade.’

<footnote n="21">²¹ Common nouns are marked by *u* (NM) and are inflected for case as *k-u* (nominative), *t-u* (oblique), *n-u* (genitive).</footnote>

<footnote n="22">²² Ca~root-an reduplication is formed by repeating the root’s initial consonant followed by /a/.</footnote>
Most ideophones are used as verbs and only about 10% are also used as nouns,<fnref n="21" /> in contrast with all other lexical roots which do not show any such categorical restriction in Amis. Instances of ideophones used as nouns by zero derivation are *teki*~*tekiq* ‘clanking sound’ in (33b), *teraq* ‘a drop’ in example (11c), *badambang* ‘stormy weather, a mess’. They sometimes depict the SOURCE of the sound, for instance, *ciwciw* ‘peep peep’ also means ‘a chick, a duckling’.

<table><caption>**Table 3:** Some derivational processes of ideophones.</caption><thead><tr><th>IDEOPHONE</th><th>DERIVED IDEOPHONIC VERB<br>(DESCRIPTIVE USE)</th><th>DERIVED NOUN<br>by Ca~reduplication-an<fnref n="22" /></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>cikcik 'sound of chopping'</td><td>mi-cikcik 'slice, chop'</td><td>ca-cikcik-an 'chopping board'</td></tr><tr><td>tuktuk 'sound of hitting'</td><td>mi-tuktuk 'beat'<br>mi-sa-tuktuk 'beat the drum'</td><td>ta-tuktuk-an 'drum'</td></tr><tr><td>kingking 'sound of ringing,<br>clink, tinkle'</td><td>mi-kingking 'ring, make a tinkling<br>sound'</td><td>ka-kingking-an 'bell'</td></tr></tbody></table>

The word *cas*, which depicts a sizzling sound, followed by *sa* as in (34a), also appears under its reduplicated form *cas*~*cas* to depict the sound of splashing water or the source of that sound, a ‘splattering waterfall’ (34b); in (34c), it is derived as a verb ‘splatter like a waterfall’ and used descriptively.

(34)

a. Ca::s sa=tu k-u dangah n-umita.

IDEO.LENGT say=PFV NOM-NM pot GEN-1PL.INCL

‘Sizzle goes the cooking-pot.’ (Katacumuli.041)

b. Ma-tengil=aku k-u suni n-u cas~cas.

UV-hear=GEN.3SG NOM-NM sound GEN-NM RDP~IDEO.cascade

‘I can hear the sound of the cascade.’

c. Ma-sa-cas~cas k-ina nanum.

NAV-do-RDP~IDEO NOM-NM water

‘The water is splattering like a cascade.’

<footnote n="21">²¹ Common nouns are marked by *u* (NM) and are inflected for case as *k-u* (nominative), *t-u* (oblique), *n-u* (genitive).</footnote>

<footnote n="22">²² Ca~root-an reduplication is formed by repeating the root’s initial consonant followed by /a/.</footnote>
## 4.2. The semantic extension of ideophones

Ideophones are often polysemous owing (i) to their vague semantics applying by analogy and with context-dependent meaning, or (ii) owing to their metaphorical extension to similar perceptual contexts within close semantic range.

Telaq depicts the sound of fire-crackers, rifle shots, applause and thunder claps. Kelaq depicts rattling, cracking or creaking sounds, extending to the sound of walking with wooden clogs and to a 'wooden tipcart' that makes a rattling sound. Peri~periq depicts sounds occurring in fast succession like 1) the sound of a machine-gun, 2) speaking like a machine-gun (35a), by extension 3) the sound of diarrhea, and of 4) a watery mud-slide as in (35b) where the ideophone functions as a modifier.

(35)

a. Peri~periq han a s<em>uwal.
RDP~IDEO do.so LK <UM>speak
'He spoke like a machine-gun.'

b. U ma-peri~periq-ay a lutuk.
NM NAV-RDP~IDEO-MODF LK mountain
'A mountain-mud-slide.'

Siw and siw~siw depict a swift motion with a hissing sound. In (36a-b), it is depictive, followed by sa 'say'; in (36b) it depicts an AUDITIVE and VISUAL event, namely the swift motion of a snake; it may also depict the VISUAL event of a shooting-star, only retaining the swift motion. In the last two occurrences, it is derived: as a verb mi-siwasiw (with epenthetic /a/) in (36c) with the meaning 'winnow, chaff'; into the even more abstract meaning 'select' (interestingly, English winnow has a similar semantic evolution 'sift in the wind' and 'select') in (36d). In both of these latter examples, it is used descriptively.

(36)

a. Siw sa-an.
IDEO say-LV
'It went whiz.' (U nipiketun ni Hayan.0059)

b. Kalamkam siw~siw sa k-u quner haw.
be.fast RDP~IDEO say NOM-NM snake DISC
'The snake was fast, it went whiz.' (U uner a kawas.047)
## 4.2. The semantic extension of ideophones

Ideophones are often polysemous owing (i) to their vague semantics applying by analogy and with context-dependent meaning, or (ii) owing to their metaphorical extension to similar perceptual contexts within close semantic range.

Telaq depicts the sound of fire-crackers, rifle shots, applause and thunder claps. Kelaq depicts rattling, cracking or creaking sounds, extending to the sound of walking with wooden clogs and to a 'wooden tipcart' that makes a rattling sound. Peri~periq depicts sounds occurring in fast succession like 1) the sound of a machine-gun, 2) speaking like a machine-gun (35a), by extension 3) the sound of diarrhea, and of 4) a watery mud-slide as in (35b) where the ideophone functions as a modifier.

(35)

a. Peri~periq han a s<em>uwal.
RDP~IDEO do.so LK <UM>speak
'He spoke like a machine-gun.'

b. U ma-peri~periq-ay a lutuk.
NM NAV-RDP~IDEO-MODF LK mountain
'A mountain-mud-slide.'

Siw and siw~siw depict a swift motion with a hissing sound. In (36a-b), it is depictive, followed by sa 'say'; in (36b) it depicts an AUDITIVE and VISUAL event, namely the swift motion of a snake; it may also depict the VISUAL event of a shooting-star, only retaining the swift motion. In the last two occurrences, it is derived: as a verb mi-siwasiw (with epenthetic /a/) in (36c) with the meaning 'winnow, chaff'; into the even more abstract meaning 'select' (interestingly, English winnow has a similar semantic evolution 'sift in the wind' and 'select') in (36d). In both of these latter examples, it is used descriptively.

(36)

a. Siw sa-an.
IDEO say-LV
'It went whiz.' (U nipiketun ni Hayan.0059)

b. Kalamkam siw~siw sa k-u quner haw.
be.fast RDP~IDEO say NOM-NM snake DISC
'The snake was fast, it went whiz.' (U uner a kawas.047)
c. Mi-siwasiw t-u tipus.
AV-IDEO.winnow OBL-NM rice
'(they) winnow the rice.'

d. Mi-siwasiw t-u kapah-ay atu raqcus-ay a demak.
AV-IDEO.winnow OBL-NM good-MODF and bad-MODF LK action
'(they) select the good from the bad actions.' (U puduc nu pawli.024)

The ideophone *tibtib* 'pulse, vibrate' also refers to the 'jew's harp/vibrator', and owing to their similar shapes (namely, a VISUAL feature), it colexifies the 'shuttle' used in knitting fishing nets. Note that the non-ideophonic word for the 'jew's harp' is *datuk*.

The two following cases show the semantic extensions of ideophones towards more abstract meanings. *Tera*~*teraq* depicts the sound of flowing water, the splattering sound of rain or water (see also example (11)). It may also refer to an intense flow of tears in (37a), with vowel lengthening expresses intensity and emphasis.<fnref n="23" /> In (37b), it is derived as a deverbal noun and its semantic range extends to a VISUAL experience (blood traces) rather than an auditory one; in this case it is used descriptively.

(37)

a. Tera~tera::q sa k-u lusaq.
RDP~IDEO:LENGT say NOM-NM tear
'His tears dropped and dro::pped.' (Pangangan.008, 10)

b. Mi-dudu t-u ni-ka-teraq-an n-u remes.
AV-follow OBL-NM PFV.NMZ-NFIN-IDEO-NMZ GEN-NM blood
'(they) followed the blood drippings.' (u patay ni Calaw Ilikic.048)
(Lit. (they) followed the blood that had dripped)

Thus, ideophones with faded or lost sensory depiction favor semantic extension towards more abstract meaning and descriptive use.

## 5. Northern Amis ideophones in a typological perspective

The most frequent ideophones in the corpus depict the sounds of water, wind, animals, human sounds related to bodily functions ('cough', 'breathe'), to speech or

<footnote n="23">²³ The character is afflicted by constant crying.</footnote>
c. Mi-siwasiw t-u tipus.
AV-IDEO.winnow OBL-NM rice
'(they) winnow the rice.'

d. Mi-siwasiw t-u kapah-ay atu raqcus-ay a demak.
AV-IDEO.winnow OBL-NM good-MODF and bad-MODF LK action
'(they) select the good from the bad actions.' (U puduc nu pawli.024)

The ideophone *tibtib* 'pulse, vibrate' also refers to the 'jew's harp/vibrator', and owing to their similar shapes (namely, a VISUAL feature), it colexifies the 'shuttle' used in knitting fishing nets. Note that the non-ideophonic word for the 'jew's harp' is *datuk*.

The two following cases show the semantic extensions of ideophones towards more abstract meanings. *Tera*~*teraq* depicts the sound of flowing water, the splattering sound of rain or water (see also example (11)). It may also refer to an intense flow of tears in (37a), with vowel lengthening expresses intensity and emphasis.<fnref n="23" /> In (37b), it is derived as a deverbal noun and its semantic range extends to a VISUAL experience (blood traces) rather than an auditory one; in this case it is used descriptively.

(37)

a. Tera~tera::q sa k-u lusaq.
RDP~IDEO:LENGT say NOM-NM tear
'His tears dropped and dro::pped.' (Pangangan.008, 10)

b. Mi-dudu t-u ni-ka-teraq-an n-u remes.
AV-follow OBL-NM PFV.NMZ-NFIN-IDEO-NMZ GEN-NM blood
'(they) followed the blood drippings.' (u patay ni Calaw Ilikic.048)
(Lit. (they) followed the blood that had dripped)

Thus, ideophones with faded or lost sensory depiction favor semantic extension towards more abstract meaning and descriptive use.

## 5. Northern Amis ideophones in a typological perspective

The most frequent ideophones in the corpus depict the sounds of water, wind, animals, human sounds related to bodily functions ('cough', 'breathe'), to speech or

<footnote n="23">²³ The character is afflicted by constant crying.</footnote>
cries ('murmur', 'howl'); sounds related to motion and movement ('fall', 'clattering walk'), sounds produced by using tools, weapons ('cut', 'scrape', 'strike', etc.), artefacts and instruments. Some of them depict VISUAL perception associated with fast motion like *siw* referring to a shooting-star, or gestures such as rubbing, brushing off, with or without sound. Some depict MOVEMENTS like falling, tumbling down, shaking, flapping wings. Few of them denote tactile sensations, apart from *kapkap* 'grope' (in the dark). No ideophones depicting shape or texture have been encountered.

Dingemanse (2018: 9) states that cross-linguistically, ideophones generally evoke actions and properties rather than objects. This is generally true of Amis, though some of these ideophones may extend to the entities that produce the sound, or to animals named after their cries.

The semantic domains covered by ideophones in Northern Amis mirror Dingemanse's implicational hierarchy (2012), predicting that if languages have ideophones for semantic domains to the right side of the hierarchy, they must then have ideophones on the left. Sound and movement are predicted to be the most common.

(i) Dingemanse's implicational hierarchy (2012)

SOUND < MOVEMENT < FORM < TEXTURE < OTHER SENSORY PERCEPTIONS

In Amis sound-depicting and sound-&-movement depicting ideophones are the most numerous, followed by those associating movement-&-visual perception.

(ii) The semantic domains of ideophones in Northern Amis

SOUND < SOUND & MOVEMENT < MOVEMENT & VISUAL PERCEPTION < BAD SMELL

The semantic domains of Japonic ideophones are given in (iii) for comparison, since a fifty-year long Japanese occupation of Taiwan (1895-1945) has left a lasting linguistic impact on Formosan languages, with numerous loan words in present-day Amis.

(iii) The semantic domains of ideophones in Japonic languages (McLean 2021: 528)

SOUND < MOVEMENT < SHAPE < TACTITION < INNER PERCEPTIONS < SMELL < COLOUR < TASTE

In contrast with Japonic ideophones where shape and tactile ideophones stand in the middle of the hierarchy, these are non-existent in Amis. Inner perceptions are also very infrequent in Northern Amis, with the possible exception of *pirpir* 'heart-beat'
cries ('murmur', 'howl'); sounds related to motion and movement ('fall', 'clattering walk'), sounds produced by using tools, weapons ('cut', 'scrape', 'strike', etc.), artefacts and instruments. Some of them depict VISUAL perception associated with fast motion like *siw* referring to a shooting-star, or gestures such as rubbing, brushing off, with or without sound. Some depict MOVEMENTS like falling, tumbling down, shaking, flapping wings. Few of them denote tactile sensations, apart from *kapkap* 'grope' (in the dark). No ideophones depicting shape or texture have been encountered.

Dingemanse (2018: 9) states that cross-linguistically, ideophones generally evoke actions and properties rather than objects. This is generally true of Amis, though some of these ideophones may extend to the entities that produce the sound, or to animals named after their cries.

The semantic domains covered by ideophones in Northern Amis mirror Dingemanse's implicational hierarchy (2012), predicting that if languages have ideophones for semantic domains to the right side of the hierarchy, they must then have ideophones on the left. Sound and movement are predicted to be the most common.

(i) Dingemanse's implicational hierarchy (2012)

SOUND < MOVEMENT < FORM < TEXTURE < OTHER SENSORY PERCEPTIONS

In Amis sound-depicting and sound-&-movement depicting ideophones are the most numerous, followed by those associating movement-&-visual perception.

(ii) The semantic domains of ideophones in Northern Amis

SOUND < SOUND & MOVEMENT < MOVEMENT & VISUAL PERCEPTION < BAD SMELL

The semantic domains of Japonic ideophones are given in (iii) for comparison, since a fifty-year long Japanese occupation of Taiwan (1895-1945) has left a lasting linguistic impact on Formosan languages, with numerous loan words in present-day Amis.

(iii) The semantic domains of ideophones in Japonic languages (McLean 2021: 528)

SOUND < MOVEMENT < SHAPE < TACTITION < INNER PERCEPTIONS < SMELL < COLOUR < TASTE

In contrast with Japonic ideophones where shape and tactile ideophones stand in the middle of the hierarchy, these are non-existent in Amis. Inner perceptions are also very infrequent in Northern Amis, with the possible exception of *pirpir* 'heart-beat'
and *mirmir* ‘shiver, shake’, with their voiceless oral and voiced nasal consonant alternation. In Japanese, smell and taste are the lowest on the scale; in Northern Amis, bad smells and taste words are defined by specific templates and amount respectively to 15% and 9% of all identified ideophones; however, taste words tend to be de-ideophonized. Further investigation shows that Amis ideophones are most generally not borrowed, with only two traceable loan words, *tera*~*teraq* ‘sound of rain, of flowing liquid’ possibly from Japanese *tara tara* ‘trickle’, and *kurukuru*? ‘IDEO.tumble.down’ possibly from Japanese *kuru kuru* ‘sound of something rotating or spinning round’. This supports Blust’s (2013: 565) remark that ideophones and onomatopoeia are rarely borrowed in Austronesian languages.

## 6. Ideophones in other Formosan languages

Blust (1988; 2013: 565) argued that in Austronesian languages, many ideophones show regular sound correspondences, like other lexemes. Many of the ideophones in Amis are reflexes of Blust’s reconstructed onomatopoetic PAn roots (see Table 5 in the Appendix); other Austronesian languages, among them Ilocano (Philippines), also have cognates identifiable by regular sound correspondences. Among Formosan languages,<fnref n="24" /> a few ideophones are common to Northern Amis, Seediq and Kavalan (ckv; Lee 2017) as shown in Table 4.

<table><caption>**Table 4:** Ideophones common to Northern Amis, Seediq and Kavalan (Formosan)</caption><thead><tr><th>NORTHERN AMIS</th><th>SEEDIQ</th><th>KAVALAN</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>?uh?uh ‘sound of coughing, cough’</td><td>quh ‘sound of coughing’</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>tuktuk ‘sound of knocking, beating a drum’</td><td>-tuk as a submorpheme of tatuk ‘knock’ (Lee 2017: 206)</td><td>tuktuk ‘knocking sound’</td></tr><tr><td>rasmas ‘drizzle’ (visual)</td><td>ras ‘sound of ‘flowing water’</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>telaq ‘sound of rifle shots’</td><td>tlelak ‘sound of a machine gun’</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>kela~kelaq ‘rattling, cracking, creaking sound; sound of a creaking tipcart’</td><td>kerak ‘sound of an old car being driven’</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote n="24">²⁴ This relies on available published research and needs more investigation.</footnote>
and *mirmir* ‘shiver, shake’, with their voiceless oral and voiced nasal consonant alternation. In Japanese, smell and taste are the lowest on the scale; in Northern Amis, bad smells and taste words are defined by specific templates and amount respectively to 15% and 9% of all identified ideophones; however, taste words tend to be de-ideophonized. Further investigation shows that Amis ideophones are most generally not borrowed, with only two traceable loan words, *tera*~*teraq* ‘sound of rain, of flowing liquid’ possibly from Japanese *tara* *tara* ‘trickle’, and *kurukuru*? ‘IDEO.tumble.down’ possibly from Japanese *kuru* *kuru* ‘sound of something rotating or spinning round’. This supports Blust’s (2013: 565) remark that ideophones and onomatopoeia are rarely borrowed in Austronesian languages.

## 6. Ideophones in other Formosan languages

Blust (1988; 2013: 565) argued that in Austronesian languages, many ideophones show regular sound correspondences, like other lexemes. Many of the ideophones in Amis are reflexes of Blust’s reconstructed onomatopoetic PAn roots (see Table 5 in the Appendix); other Austronesian languages, among them Ilocano (Philippines), also have cognates identifiable by regular sound correspondences. Among Formosan languages,<fnref n="24" /> a few ideophones are common to Northern Amis, *Seediq* and *Kavalan* (ckv; Lee 2017) as shown in Table 4.

<table><caption>**Table 4:** Ideophones common to Northern Amis, *Seediq* and *Kavalan* (Formosan)</caption><thead><tr><th>NORTHERN AMIS</th><th>SEEDIQ</th><th>KAVALAN</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>?uh?uh ‘sound of coughing, cough’</td><td>quh ‘sound of coughing’</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>tuktuk ‘sound of knocking, beating a drum’</td><td>-tuk as a submorpheme of tatuk ‘knock’ (Lee 2017: 206)</td><td>tuktuk ‘knocking sound’</td></tr><tr><td>rasmas ‘drizzle’ (visual)</td><td>ras ‘sound of ‘flowing water’</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>telaq ‘sound of rifle shots’</td><td>tlelak ‘sound of a machine gun’</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>kela~kelaq ‘rattling, cracking, creaking sound; sound of a creaking tipcart’</td><td>kerak ‘sound of an old car being driven’</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote n="24">²⁴ This relies on available published research and needs more investigation.</footnote>
The ideophones *?ak?ak* in Northern Amis and *ak-ak-ak* in Siraya (fos) depict the cry of ravens and extend to the bird; however, in Siraya, the ideophone is also derived as a verb in (38) extending to mocking, cackling sounds produced by human beings.

(38) Siraya (Formosan; Adelaar 2011: 259)

Ni-mau-ak-ak-ak ma-tawa tīni-än.

PAST-AS-cackle-cackle AV-laugh 3sg-LOC

‘They laughed at him with scorn.’ (ix24) (AS = anticipating sequence)

The question of how ideophonic roots are transmitted is commented on by Blust
(2009: 357):

> "If submorphemic sound-meaning correlations are distributed over a number of genetically related languages in non-cognate morphemes, one must ask how such patterns can be transmitted independently of the forms that exemplify them. There are two logical possibilities: 1) they are transmitted in sets of morphemes which contain a recurrent submorphemic sound-meaning correlation that is then extended to neologisms, or 2) the abstract pattern itself is internalised."

Much work remains to be done before satisfactory answers can be brought to bear on
this question.

7. Conclusion

Ideophones are a small subset of the Northern Amis vocabulary (around 4.4% of my
4800 lexical database). They are commonly followed by *sa* ‘say’ or by *han* ‘do so’ and
are used to depict sensations (auditory, motion, visual, smells, tastes, etc.) and to
convey liveliness and personal reaction. Many ideophones can be used depictively as
well as descriptively, in the latter case, they tend to be more grammatically integrated
words, i.e., as derived and inflected verbs, more marginally as nouns, yet they retain
their original expressive sensory properties.
The ideophones *?ak?ak* in Northern Amis and *ak-ak-ak* in Siraya (fos) depict the cry of ravens and extend to the bird; however, in Siraya, the ideophone is also derived as a verb in (38) extending to mocking, cackling sounds produced by human beings.

(38) Siraya (Formosan; Adelaar 2011: 259)

Ni-mau-ak-ak-ak ma-tawa tīni-än.

PAST-AS-cackle-cackle AV-laugh 3sg-LOC

‘They laughed at him with scorn.’ (ix24) (AS = anticipating sequence)

The question of how ideophonic roots are transmitted is commented on by Blust (2009: 357):

> "If submorphemic sound-meaning correlations are distributed over a number of genetically related languages in non-cognate morphemes, one must ask how such patterns can be transmitted independently of the forms that exemplify them. There are two logical possibilities: 1) they are transmitted in sets of morphemes which contain a recurrent submorphemic sound-meaning correlation that is then extended to neologisms, or 2) the abstract pattern itself is internalised."

Much work remains to be done before satisfactory answers can be brought to bear on this question.

## 7. Conclusion

Ideophones are a small subset of the Northern Amis vocabulary (around 4.4% of my 4800 lexical database). They are commonly followed by *sa* ‘say’ or by *han* ‘do so’ and are used to depict sensations (auditory, motion, visual, smells, tastes, etc.) and to convey liveliness and personal reaction. Many ideophones can be used depictively as well as descriptively, in the latter case, they tend to be more grammatically integrated words, i.e., as derived and inflected verbs, more marginally as nouns, yet they retain their original expressive sensory properties.
## Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the LACITO-CNRS and financed by the research strand 3 “Typology and dynamics of linguistic systems” of the Labex EFL (Empirical Foundations of Linguistics) (Investissements d’Avenir, ANR-10-LABX-0083/CGI). It is part of IdEx Paris University (ANR-18-IDEX-0001).

I am very grateful to all Amis consultants and friends for their invaluable collaboration. I also thank the editors of this special issue and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive and thought-provoking remarks that led to some reorganization of this article.

## Abbreviations

1 = 1st person

2 = 2nd person

3 = 3rd person

AV = actor voice

CA~ = Ca~reduplication

CAUS = causative

COMP = complementiser

COS = change of state

CV = conveyance voice

DEIC = deictic marker

EP = epenthetic

EXCL = exclusive

EXS = existential

FUT = future

GEN = genitive

HORT = hortative

IDEO = ideophone

IMP = imperative

INCH = inchoative

INCL = inclusive

INFX = infix

INTENS = intensive

LENGT = lengthening

LK = linker

LOC = locative

LV = locative voice

MODF = modifier

NAV = non-actor voice

NEG = negation

NFIN = non-finite

NOM = nominative

NM = noun marker

NMZ = nominalizer

OBL = oblique

ONOM = onomatopoeia

PFV = perfective

PM = person marker

POSS = possessive

PREP = preposition

PROH = prohibitive

PSA = preferred syntactic

argument

RDP = reduplication

## References

Adelaar, Alexander K. 2011. *Siraya Retrieving the Phonology, Grammar and Lexicon of a Dormant Formosan Language*. Trends in Linguistics Documentation 30. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.

Akita, Kimi. 2017. The linguistic integration of Japanese ideophones and its typological implications. *Canadian Journal of Linguistics*, 62(2). 314–333.
## Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the LACITO-CNRS and financed by the research strand 3 “Typology and dynamics of linguistic systems” of the Labex EFL (Empirical Foundations of Linguistics) (Investissements d’Avenir, ANR-10-LABX-0083/CGI). It is part of IdEx Paris University (ANR-18-IDEX-0001).

I am very grateful to all Amis consultants and friends for their invaluable collaboration. I also thank the editors of this special issue and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive and thought-provoking remarks that led to some reorganization of this article.

## Abbreviations

1 = 1st person

2 = 2nd person

3 = 3rd person

AV = actor voice

CA~ = Ca~reduplication

CAUS = causative

COMP = complementiser

COS = change of state

CV = conveyance voice

DEIC = deictic marker

EP = epenthetic

EXCL = exclusive

EXS = existential

FUT = future

GEN = genitive

HORT = hortative

IDEO = ideophone

IMP = imperative

INCH = inchoative

INCL = inclusive

INFX = infix

INTENS = intensive

LENGT = lengthening

LK = linker

LOC = locative

LV = locative voice

MODF = modifier

NAV = non-actor voice

NEG = negation

NFIN = non-finite

NOM = nominative

NM = noun marker

NMZ = nominalizer

OBL = oblique

ONOM = onomatopoeia

PFV = perfective

PM = person marker

POSS = possessive

PREP = preposition

PROH = prohibitive

PSA = preferred syntactic

argument

RDP = reduplication

## References

Adelaar, Alexander K. 2011. *Siraya Retrieving the Phonology, Grammar and Lexicon of a Dormant Formosan Language*. Trends in Linguistics Documentation 30. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.

Akita, Kimi. 2017. The linguistic integration of Japanese ideophones and its typological implications. *Canadian Journal of Linguistics*, 62(2). 314–333.
Ameka, Felix K. 2001. Ideophones and the Nature of the Adjective Word Class in Ewe. In Voeltz, F. K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.), *Ideophones*, 25–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Bergen, Benjamin K. 2004. The psychological reality of phonaesthemes. *Language* 80. 290–311.

Blust, Robert. 1988. *Austronesian Root Theory; an essay on the limits of morphology*. SLCS 19. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Blust, Robert. 2003. The phonestheme η- in Austronesian languages. *Oceanic Linguistics* 42. 187–212.

Blust, Robert. 2009. *The Austronesian languages*. Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.

Blust, Robert. 2013. *The Austronesian languages*. (Revised version). Asia-Pacific Linguistics; Canberra, Australian National University.

Blust, Robert. 2022. *A Dictionary of Austronesian Monosyllabic Roots (Submorphemes)*. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Blust, Robert & Stephen Trussel. *The Austronesian Comparative Dictionary (ongoing)*. Available online at: http://ling.lll.hawaii.edu/dicts/ACD/.

Bril, Isabelle. 2016. Information Structure in Northern Amis (Formosan): a morphosyntactic analysis. *Oceanic linguistics*, 55(2). 451-481.

Bril, Isabelle. 2017. Roots and stems: Lexical and functional flexibility in Amis and Nêlêmwa. *Studies in Language* 41(2). 358-407.

Bril, Isabelle & Skopeteas, Stavros. 2021. The syntax and prosody of focus in Northern Amis (Formosan). In Haude, Katharina, Palancar, Enrique & Vanhove, Martine (eds.). *Special issue on Clefts. Faits de Langue*. 51(2). 61-87.

Bril, Isabelle. 2022. Lexical restrictions on grammatical relations in voice constructions (Northern Amis). In Eva van Lier and Maria Messerschmidt (eds.), *Lexical restrictions on grammatical relations in voice and valency constructions*. [Special issue]. *STUF Language Typology and Universals*, 75(1). 21-71.

Chen, Teresa M. 1969. *Natauran texts*. Unpublished manuscript.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2011. *The meaning and use of ideophones in Siwu*. Doctoral Dissertation, Radboud University, Nijmegen.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2012. Advances in the Cross-Linguistic Study of Ideophones. *Language and Linguistic Compass* 6(10). 654–672.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2017. Expressiveness and system integration: On the typology of ideophones, with special reference to Siwu. *STUF* 70(2). 363–384.
Ameka, Felix K. 2001. Ideophones and the Nature of the Adjective Word Class in Ewe. In Voeltz, F. K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.), *Ideophones*, 25–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Bergen, Benjamin K. 2004. The psychological reality of phonaesthemes. *Language* 80. 290–311.

Blust, Robert. 1988. *Austronesian Root Theory; an essay on the limits of morphology*. SLCS 19. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Blust, Robert. 2003. The phonestheme η- in Austronesian languages. *Oceanic Linguistics* 42. 187–212.

Blust, Robert. 2009. *The Austronesian languages*. Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.

Blust, Robert. 2013. *The Austronesian languages*. (Revised version). Asia-Pacific Linguistics; Canberra, Australian National University.

Blust, Robert. 2022. *A Dictionary of Austronesian Monosyllabic Roots (Submorphemes)*. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Blust, Robert & Stephen Trussel. *The Austronesian Comparative Dictionary (ongoing)*. Available online at: http://ling.lll.hawaii.edu/dicts/ACD/.

Bril, Isabelle. 2016. Information Structure in Northern Amis (Formosan): a morphosyntactic analysis. *Oceanic linguistics*, 55(2). 451-481.

Bril, Isabelle. 2017. Roots and stems: Lexical and functional flexibility in Amis and Nêlêmwa. *Studies in Language* 41(2). 358-407.

Bril, Isabelle & Skopeteas, Stavros. 2021. The syntax and prosody of focus in Northern Amis (Formosan). In Haude, Katharina, Palancar, Enrique & Vanhove, Martine (eds.). *Special issue on Clefts. Faits de Langue*. 51(2). 61-87.

Bril, Isabelle. 2022. Lexical restrictions on grammatical relations in voice constructions (Northern Amis). In Eva van Lier and Maria Messerschmidt (eds.), *Lexical restrictions on grammatical relations in voice and valency constructions*. [Special issue]. *STUF Language Typology and Universals*, 75(1). 21-71.

Chen, Teresa M. 1969. *Natauran texts*. Unpublished manuscript.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2011. *The meaning and use of ideophones in Siwu*. Doctoral Dissertation, Radboud University, Nijmegen.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2012. Advances in the Cross-Linguistic Study of Ideophones. *Language and Linguistic Compass* 6(10). 654–672.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2017. Expressiveness and system integration: On the typology of ideophones, with special reference to Siwu. *STUF* 70(2). 363–384.
Dingemanse, Mark. 2018. Redrawing the margins of language: Lessons from research on ideophones. *Glossa: a journal of general linguistics* 31(4). 1–30.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2023. Ideophones. *The Oxford Handbook of Word Classes*, ed. By Eva van Lier. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Preprint doi: 10.31234/osf.io/u96zt.

Dingemanse, Mark & Akita, Kimi. 2017. An inverse relation between expressiveness and grammatical integration: On the morphosyntactic typology of ideophones, with special reference to Japanese. *Journal of Linguistics*, 53(3). 501–532.

Fey, Virginia. 1986. *Amis dictionary*. Taipei: Evangelical Alliance Mission.

Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide. 2017. Basque ideophones from a typological perspective. *The Canadian Journal of Linguistics/La revue canadienne de linguistique* 62(2). 196–220.

Klamer, Marian. 2001. Expressives and iconicity in the lexicon. In Voeltz, F.K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.), 165-182.

Lee, Amy Pei-jung. 2015. Lexical categories and conceptualization of olfaction in Amis. *Language and Cognition*, 7(3). 321-350.

Lee, Amy Pei-jung. 2017. Ideophones, Interjections, and Sound Symbolism in Seediq. *Oceanic Linguistics*, 56(1). 181-209.

Li, Paul Jen-kuei & Tsuchida, Shigeru. 2009. Yet more Proto Austronesian infixes. *Discovering history through language: papers in honour of Malcolm Ross*, 345–362. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.

McLean, Bonnie. 2021. Revising an implicational hierarchy for the meanings of ideophones, with special reference to Japonic. *Linguistic Typology*, 25(3). 507–549. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2020-2063

Poinsot, Maurice & Pourrias, Louis. 1966. *Dictionnaire amis-français*. Paris: Société des Missions Etrangères de Paris.

Rata, Namoh. 2013. *Ameizuyu cidian* [*Amis dictionary*]. Taipei: Nantian shuju [SMC Publishing Inc.].

Reid, Lawrence. 1994. Morphological Evidence for Austric. *Oceanic Linguistics*, 33(2). 323-344.

Rubino, Carl. 2001. Iconic morphology and word formation in Ilocano. In Voeltz, F.K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.), 303-320.

Teng, Stacy Fang-Ching. 2008. *A Reference Grammar of Puyuma*. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics 595.

Voeltz, F.K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.). 2001. *Ideophones*. TSL 44. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Dingemanse, Mark. 2018. Redrawing the margins of language: Lessons from research on ideophones. *Glossa: a journal of general linguistics* 31(4). 1–30.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2023. Ideophones. *The Oxford Handbook of Word Classes*, ed. By Eva van Lier. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Preprint doi: 10.31234/osf.io/u96zt.

Dingemanse, Mark & Akita, Kimi. 2017. An inverse relation between expressiveness and grammatical integration: On the morphosyntactic typology of ideophones, with special reference to Japanese. *Journal of Linguistics*, 53(3). 501–532.

Fey, Virginia. 1986. *Amis dictionary*. Taipei: Evangelical Alliance Mission.

Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide. 2017. Basque ideophones from a typological perspective. *The Canadian Journal of Linguistics/La revue canadienne de linguistique* 62(2). 196–220.

Klamer, Marian. 2001. Expressives and iconicity in the lexicon. In Voeltz, F.K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.), 165-182.

Lee, Amy Pei-jung. 2015. Lexical categories and conceptualization of olfaction in Amis. *Language and Cognition*, 7(3). 321-350.

Lee, Amy Pei-jung. 2017. Ideophones, Interjections, and Sound Symbolism in Seediq. *Oceanic Linguistics*, 56(1). 181-209.

Li, Paul Jen-kuei & Tsuchida, Shigeru. 2009. Yet more Proto Austronesian infixes. *Discovering history through language: papers in honour of Malcolm Ross*, 345–362. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.

McLean, Bonnie. 2021. Revising an implicational hierarchy for the meanings of ideophones, with special reference to Japonic. *Linguistic Typology*, 25(3). 507–549. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2020-2063

Poinsot, Maurice & Pourrias, Louis. 1966. *Dictionnaire amis-français*. Paris: Société des Missions Etrangères de Paris.

Rata, Namoh. 2013. *Ameizuyu cidian* [*Amis dictionary*]. Taipei: Nantian shuju [SMC Publishing Inc.].

Reid, Lawrence. 1994. Morphological Evidence for Austric. *Oceanic Linguistics*, 33(2). 323-344.

Rubino, Carl. 2001. Iconic morphology and word formation in Ilocano. In Voeltz, F.K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.), 303-320.

Teng, Stacy Fang-Ching. 2008. *A Reference Grammar of Puyuma*. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics 595.

Voeltz, F.K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.). 2001. *Ideophones*. TSL 44. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Wu, Joy Jing-lan. 2006. *Verb classification, case marking, and grammatical relations in Amis*. PhD dissertation. New York, NY: University at Buffalo, the State University of New York.

Zeitoun, Elizabeth. 2023. Ideophones vs. onomatopoeia in Tungho Saisiyat. Paper read at the Bi-monthly Colloquium of the Institute of Linguistics at Academia Sinica. March 13, 2023. Taipei: Academia Sinica.

CONTACT

isabelle.bril@cnrs.fr
Wu, Joy Jing-lan. 2006. *Verb classification, case marking, and grammatical relations in Amis*. PhD dissertation. New York, NY: University at Buffalo, the State University of New York.

Zeitoun, Elizabeth. 2023. Ideophones vs. onomatopoeia in Tungho Saisiyat. Paper read at the Bi-monthly Colloquium of the Institute of Linguistics at Academia Sinica. March 13, 2023. Taipei: Academia Sinica.

CONTACT

isabelle.bril@cnrs.fr