<table><caption>**Table 19.** Integration of ideophones in the Teko language.</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>regular</th><th>marginal</th><th>different than nouns or verbs</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>root structure<br>(3.2)</td><td>yes<br>(same syllable structures)</td><td>yes<br>(two potential exceptions)</td><td>different distribution<br>of structures</td></tr><tr><td>stress (4.2)</td><td></td><td>yes<br>(some special stress patterns)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>prosody (4.3 to 4.5)</td><td></td><td>partially<br>(salient mean vowel duration, pitch and intensity)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>expressive use of prosody<br>(4.3 to 4.5)</td><td>yes<br>(found with other word classes)</td><td></td><td>to be investigated</td></tr><tr><td>morphology<br>(5.2)</td><td>yes<br>(absence also found in other types of root)</td><td></td><td>no bound<br>morphology</td></tr><tr><td>duplication<br>(5.3)</td><td>yes<br>(also on verbs)</td><td></td><td>different patterns<br>than on verbs</td></tr><tr><td>word-class changing derivation (5.4)</td><td>yes</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>syntax<br>(6)</td><td>yes<br>(integrated constructions)</td><td>yes<br>(independent constructions)</td><td>different types of syntactic integration</td></tr><tr><td>sentence types<br>(7.1)</td><td>yes</td><td></td><td>mostly in declarative sentences</td></tr><tr><td>discourse genre<br>(7.2)</td><td>yes</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>series<br>(7.3)</td><td></td><td>yes<br>(series of more than two items)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>semantics<br>(8)</td><td>yes<br>(comparable to that of verbs)</td><td>yes<br>(depicts rather than refers)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>phonosemantics<br>(8.4)</td><td></td><td>yes<br>(some)</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>**Table 19.** Integration of ideophones in the Teko language.</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>regular</th><th>marginal</th><th>different than nouns or verbs</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>root structure<br>(3.2)</td><td>yes<br>(same syllable structures)</td><td>yes<br>(two potential exceptions)</td><td>different distribution<br>of structures</td></tr><tr><td>stress (4.2)</td><td></td><td>yes<br>(some special stress patterns)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>prosody (4.3 to 4.5)</td><td></td><td>partially<br>(salient mean vowel duration, pitch and intensity)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>expressive use of prosody<br>(4.3 to 4.5)</td><td>yes<br>(found with other word classes)</td><td></td><td>to be investigated</td></tr><tr><td>morphology<br>(5.2)</td><td>yes<br>(absence also found in other types of root)</td><td></td><td>no bound<br>morphology</td></tr><tr><td>duplication<br>(5.3)</td><td>yes<br>(also on verbs)</td><td></td><td>different patterns<br>than on verbs</td></tr><tr><td>word-class changing derivation (5.4)</td><td>yes</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>syntax<br>(6)</td><td>yes<br>(integrated constructions)</td><td>yes<br>(independent constructions)</td><td>different types of<br>syntactic integration</td></tr><tr><td>sentence types<br>(7.1)</td><td>yes</td><td></td><td>mostly in declarative sentences</td></tr><tr><td>discourse genre<br>(7.2)</td><td>yes</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>series<br>(7.3)</td><td></td><td>yes<br>(series of more than two items)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>semantics<br>(8)</td><td>yes<br>(comparable to that of verbs)</td><td>yes<br>(depicts rather than refers)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>phonosemantics<br>(8.4)</td><td></td><td>yes<br>(some)</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
The detailed presentation of Teko ideophones developed in this paper and summarized in Table 19 shows that they are in fact rather well integrated in the lexicon, i.e. they are not outside of grammar, contrary to the outdated exotic view of ideophones (see also Newman 2001). Basically, only stress, prosody and their phonosemantics set them aside from the rest of the Teko lexicon. This paper also finds that the “exotism” of ideophones is limited. Particular facts in that direction listed in the third column are often restricted to a few items, i.e. a small minority of the ideophone class. Beside the stress patterns that definitively mark some of the ideophones as categorically different from the rest of the lexicon, the other major particularities of ideophones are not categorical: their prosody is discrete, and their phonosemantics is difficult to evaluate. The one major characteristic of ideophones that is fundamental to them is their depictive power. Depiction in ideophones has generally been approached through multimodal studies (Kita 1997; Reiter 2011; Dingemanse & Akita 2017). Unfortunately, the dataset used for this particular study does not allow us to study gestures, due to the absence of video recording. The marking of depiction in Teko ideophones has been investigated in detail from two of Akita (2021)'s perspectives: the foregrounding strategy (phonological distribution, root structure, word-level prosody) and the framing strategy (syntactic construction, pauses).

Finally, and most importantly for this special issue, this paper has also shown that Teko ideophones show regularities that call for them to be considered a distinct word category. Most of these features are statistical rather than categorical, except the absence of bound morphology, which seems to be their most straightforward formal defining criterium. My personal ordered list of tests used in methodologically identifying ideophones is as follows:

i) identification of the word as a non-verb through absence of morphology

ii) identification of the word as a non-noun on the basis of translation (either absence of translation in the text translation or “translation” with a full sentence, or an example (in elicitation), rather than by a simple word)

iii) identification of the word as an ideophone if the item in question is found in constructions where ideophones are found (with their special position)

iv) decision confirmed by expressive prosody when present (or if present in a different token of the item)

v) confirmation by a consultant familiar with the metalinguistic terminology, if possible.
The detailed presentation of Teko ideophones developed in this paper and summarized in Table 19 shows that they are in fact rather well integrated in the lexicon, i.e. they are not outside of grammar, contrary to the outdated exotic view of ideophones (see also Newman 2001). Basically, only stress, prosody and their phonosemantics set them aside from the rest of the Teko lexicon. This paper also finds that the “exotism” of ideophones is limited. Particular facts in that direction listed in the third column are often restricted to a few items, i.e. a small minority of the ideophone class. Beside the stress patterns that definitively mark some of the ideophones as categorically different from the rest of the lexicon, the other major particularities of ideophones are not categorical: their prosody is discrete, and their phonosemantics is difficult to evaluate. The one major characteristic of ideophones that is fundamental to them is their depictive power. Depiction in ideophones has generally been approached through multimodal studies (Kita 1997; Reiter 2011; Dingemanse & Akita 2017). Unfortunately, the dataset used for this particular study does not allow us to study gestures, due to the absence of video recording. The marking of depiction in Teko ideophones has been investigated in detail from two of Akita (2021)'s perspectives: the foregrounding strategy (phonological distribution, root structure, word-level prosody) and the framing strategy (syntactic construction, pauses).

Finally, and most importantly for this special issue, this paper has also shown that Teko ideophones show regularities that call for them to be considered a distinct word category. Most of these features are statistical rather than categorical, except the absence of bound morphology, which seems to be their most straightforward formal defining criterium. My personal ordered list of tests used in methodologically identifying ideophones is as follows:

i) identification of the word as a non-verb through absence of morphology

ii) identification of the word as a non-noun on the basis of translation (either absence of translation in the text translation or “translation” with a full sentence, or an example (in elicitation), rather than by a simple word)

iii) identification of the word as an ideophone if the item in question is found in constructions where ideophones are found (with their special position)

iv) decision confirmed by expressive prosody when present (or if present in a different token of the item)

v) confirmation by a consultant familiar with the metalinguistic terminology, if possible.
Returning to the central idea that ideophones depict rather than refer, this fact results from the accumulation of small or large differences with respect to the rest of the lexicon. This makes the ideophones in Teko an obvious category of the language, immediately accessible to both native and non-native speakers.

## Acknowledgments

I would first like to warmly thanks students and trainees for their collaboration on the databases: Mao-Line Fillon, Kenza van den Heuvel, Yana Akvilina and Viviane Ribes. I address special thanks to Jennifer Krzonowski for precious help with Praat scripts and statistics. I would also like to thank Elsa Oréal and Jean-Luc Chevillard for coordinating a research project of the CNRS Fédération de Typologie et Universaux called *Vers une typologie des parties du discours mineures: onomatopées, idéophones, interjections* (2002-2005), as well as Aimée Lahaussois and Yvonne Treis for putting together a workshop on *Ideophones and interjections* at the Annual meeting of the SLE in 2019, later joined by Julie Marsault as editors of the current special issue. This paper has also benefited from the remarks and suggestions of two anonymous reviewers, which I sincerely thank here. Last but not least, I send my deepest gratitude to the Teko speakers who have allowed me to investigate their language two decades ago, and especially to Jammes Panapuy with his instant grasping of the concept of ideophones. I also want to thank Alexis Michaud for having shared his recordings with me long ago.

## Abbreviations

1INCL = 1st inclusive

ASSERT = assertive

CAUS = causative

CL = classifier

CONCES = concessive

CONT = continuative

CONTR = contrast

DEM = demonstrative

DESID = desiderative

DIM = diminutive

EXCL = exclamative

FOC = focus

FUT = future

IDEO = ideophone

IMP = imperative

INTER = interrogative

INTENS = intensive

MID = middle

NEG = negation

PL = plural

PL.S = plural of subject

POSTP = postposition

PRO = pronoun

PURP = purpose

RECP = reciprocal

RED = reduplication

REF = referential

REL = relativizer

RELN = relational

SG = singular

TOP_SW = topic-switch
Returning to the central idea that ideophones depict rather than refer, this fact results from the accumulation of small or large differences with respect to the rest of the lexicon. This makes the ideophones in Teko an obvious category of the language, immediately accessible to both native and non-native speakers.

## Acknowledgments

I would first like to warmly thanks students and trainees for their collaboration on the databases: Mao-Line Fillon, Kenza van den Heuvel, Yana Akvilina and Viviane Ribes. I address special thanks to Jennifer Krzonowski for precious help with Praat scripts and statistics. I would also like to thank Elsa Oréal and Jean-Luc Chevillard for coordinating a research project of the CNRS Fédération de Typologie et Universaux called *Vers une typologie des parties du discours mineures: onomatopées, idéophones, interjections* (2002-2005), as well as Aimée Lahaussois and Yvonne Treis for putting together a workshop on *Ideophones and interjections* at the Annual meeting of the SLE in 2019, later joined by Julie Marsault as editors of the current special issue. This paper has also benefited from the remarks and suggestions of two anonymous reviewers, which I sincerely thank here. Last but not least, I send my deepest gratitude to the Teko speakers who have allowed me to investigate their language two decades ago, and especially to Jammes Panapuy with his instant grasping of the concept of ideophones. I also want to thank Alexis Michaud for having shared his recordings with me long ago.

## Abbreviations

1INCL = 1st inclusive

ASSERT = assertive

CAUS = causative

CL = classifier

CONCES = concessive

CONT = continuative

CONTR = contrast

DEM = demonstrative

DESID = desiderative

DIM = diminutive

EXCL = exclamative

FOC = focus

FUT = future

IDEO = ideophone

IMP = imperative

INTER = interrogative

INTENS = intensive

MID = middle

NEG = negation

PL = plural

PL.S = plural of subject

POSTP = postposition

PRO = pronoun

PURP = purpose

RECP = reciprocal

RED = reduplication

REF = referential

REL = relativizer

RELN = relational

SG = singular

TOP_SW = topic-switch
## References

Akita, Kimi. 2021. A typology of depiction marking: The prosody of Japanese ideophones and beyond. *Studies in Language* 45(4). 865–886. (doi:10.1075/sl.17029.aki)

Akita, Kimi & Imai, Mutsumi & Saji, Noburo & Kantartzis, Katerina & Kita, Sotaro. 2013. Mimetic Vowel Harmony. In Frellesvig, Bjarke & Sells, Peter (eds.), *Japanese/Korean Linguistics*, vol. 20, 115–129. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

Aplonova, Katya & Guitang, Guillaume & Nikitina, Tatiana. 2022. Pseudowords and ideophones in West African traditional narratives. Bucharest. (Presented at the SLE Annual Meeting, Bucharest)

Association Solidarité Guyane. 2000. *Euro en Guyane. Langue amérindienne: Teko. Direction des relations avec les Publics et de la Communication du Ministère de l'Economie, des Finances et de l'Industrie.*

Birk, D.B.W. 2015. *The MalakMalak language, Daly River (Western Arnhem Land)*. B-45. Pacific Linguistics. (PDF) (doi:10.15144/PL-B45) (http://sealang.net/archives/pl/pdf/PL-B45.pdf) (Accessed November 17, 2022.)

Boersma, Paul & Weenink, David. 2023. *Praat: doing phonetics by computer* [*Computer program*]. Version 6.3.11. (http://www.praat.org)

Cachine, Jean-Marc & Couchili, Lucie & Maurel, Didier & Monerville, Eddy & Panapuy, Jammes. 2020. *Kaleta teko 'awu panaïtsï 'awu ipope ma'ẽ - dictionnaire teko - français*. (https://corporan.huma-num.fr/Lexiques/dicoTeko.html)

Childs, G. 1994. African ideophones. In Hinton, Leanne & Nichols, Johanna & Ohala, John (eds.), *Sound symbolism*, vol. Chapter 13, 178–204. Cambridge University Press.

Couchili, Ti'iwan & Maurel, Didier & Queixalós, Francesc. 2002. Classes de lexèmes en émérillon. *Amerindia* 26/27. 173–208.

Cusic, David. 1981. *Verbal plurality and aspect*. Stanford University.

Dhoorre, Cabdulqaadir Salaad & Tosco, Mauro. 1998. Somali Ideophones. *Journal of African Cultural Studies* 11(2). 125–156.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2011. *The Meaning and Use of Ideophones in Siwu*. PhD dissertation. Doctoral dissertation, Radboud University, Nijmegen.

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

Akita, Kimi. 2021. A typology of depiction marking: The prosody of Japanese ideophones and beyond. *Studies in Language* 45(4). 865–886. (doi:10.1075/sl.17029.aki)

Akita, Kimi & Imai, Mutsumi & Saji, Noburo & Kantartzis, Katerina & Kita, Sotaro. 2013. Mimetic Vowel Harmony. In Frellesvig, Bjarke & Sells, Peter (eds.), *Japanese/Korean Linguistics*, vol. 20, 115–129. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

Aplonova, Katya & Guitang, Guillaume & Nikitina, Tatiana. 2022. Pseudowords and ideophones in West African traditional narratives. Bucharest. (Presented at the SLE Annual Meeting, Bucharest)

Association Solidarité Guyane. 2000. *Euro en Guyane. Langue amérindienne: Teko. Direction des relations avec les Publics et de la Communication du Ministère de l'Economie, des Finances et de l'Industrie.*

Birk, D.B.W. 2015. *The MalakMalak language, Daly River (Western Arnhem Land)*. B-45. Pacific Linguistics. (PDF) (doi:10.15144/PL-B45) (http://sealang.net/archives/pl/pdf/PL-B45.pdf) (Accessed November 17, 2022.)

Boersma, Paul & Weenink, David. 2023. *Praat: doing phonetics by computer* [*Computer program*]. Version 6.3.11. (http://www.praat.org)

Cachine, Jean-Marc & Couchili, Lucie & Maurel, Didier & Monerville, Eddy & Panapuy, Jammes. 2020. *Kaleta teko 'awu panaïtsï 'awu ipope ma'ë - dictionnaire teko - français*. (https://corporan.huma-num.fr/Lexiques/dicoTeko.html)

Childs, G. 1994. African ideophones. In Hinton, Leanne & Nichols, Johanna & Ohala, John (eds.), *Sound symbolism*, vol. Chapter 13, 178–204. Cambridge University Press.

Couchili, Ti'iwan & Maurel, Didier & Queixalós, Francesc. 2002. Classes de lexèmes en émérillon. *Amerindia* 26/27. 173–208.

Cusic, David. 1981. *Verbal plurality and aspect*. Stanford University.

Dhoorre, Cabdulqaadir Salaad & Tosco, Mauro. 1998. Somali Ideophones. *Journal of African Cultural Studies* 11(2). 125–156.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2011. *The Meaning and Use of Ideophones in Siwu*. PhD dissertation. Doctoral dissertation, Radboud University, Nijmegen.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2012. Advances in the Cross-Linguistic Study of Ideophones. *Language and Linguistics Compass* 6(10). 654–672.
Dingemanse, Mark. 2017. Expressiveness and system integration: On the typology of ideophones, with special reference to Siwu. *STUF - Language Typology and Universals* 70(2). (10.1515/stuf-2017-0018)

Dingemanse, Mark. 2019. "Ideophone" as a comparative concept. In Akita, Kimi & Pardeshi, Prashant (eds.), *Iconicity in Language and Literature*, vol. 16, 13–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (doi:10.1075/ill.16.02din) (https://benjamins.com/catalog/ill.16.02din) (Accessed September 10, 2019)

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.

Dingemanse, Mark & Schuerman, Will & Reinisch, Eva & Tufvesson, Sylvia & Mitterer, Holger. 2016. What sound symbolism can and cannot do: testing the iconicity of ideophones from five languages. *Language* 92(2). 117–133. (doi:10.1353/lan.2016.0034)

Doke, C. 1935. *Bantu Linguistics Terminology*. London: Longmans.

Egbokhare, Francis Oisaghaede. 2001. Phonosemantic correspondences in Emai attributive ideophones. In Voeltz, F. K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.), *Ideophones* (Typological Studies in Language), vol. 44, 87–96. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (doi:10.1075/tsl.44.08egb) (https://benjamins.com/catalog/tsl.44.08egb) (Accessed October 19, 2022.)

ELAN. 2022. (*Version 6.3*) [*Computer software*]. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, The Language Archive. (https://archive.mpi.nl/tla/elan)

Gabas, Nilson Junior. 1999. *A Grammar of Karo, Tupi (Brazil)*. UCSB, Department of Linguistics.

Gijn, Rik van. 2010. Middle voice and ideophones, a diachronic connection. *Studies in Language* 34(2). 273–297.

Gordon, Matthew & Rose, Françoise. 2006. Emérillon stress: a phonetic and phonological study. *Anthropological Linguistics* 48(2). 132–168.

Güldemann, Tom. 2008. *Quotative indexes in African languages. A synchronic and diachronic survey* (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 34). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hinton, Leanne & Nichols, Johanna & Ohala, John. 1994. Introduction: sound-symbolic processes. In Hinton, Leanne & Nichols, Johanna & Ohala, John (eds.), *Sound symbolism*, 1–12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dingemanse, Mark. 2017. Expressiveness and system integration: On the typology of ideophones, with special reference to Siwu. *STUF - Language Typology and Universals* 70(2). (10.1515/stuf-2017-0018)

Dingemanse, Mark. 2019. “Ideophone” as a comparative concept. In Akita, Kimi & Pardeshi, Prashant (eds.), *Iconicity in Language and Literature*, vol. 16, 13–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (doi:10.1075/ill.16.02din) (https://benjamins.com/catalog/ill.16.02din) (Accessed September 10, 2019)

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.

Dingemanse, Mark & Schuerman, Will & Reinisch, Eva & Tufvesson, Sylvia & Mitterer, Holger. 2016. What sound symbolism can and cannot do: testing the iconicity of ideophones from five languages. *Language* 92(2). 117–133. (doi:10.1353/lan.2016.0034)

Doke, C. 1935. *Bantu Linguistics Terminology*. London: Longmans.

Egbokhare, Francis Oisaghaede. 2001. Phonosemantic correspondences in Emai attributive ideophones. In Voeltz, F. K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.), *Ideophones* (Typological Studies in Language), vol. 44, 87–96. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (doi:10.1075/tsl.44.08egb) (https://benjamins.com/catalog/tsl.44.08egb) (Accessed October 19, 2022.)

ELAN. 2022. (*Version 6.3*) [*Computer software*]. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, The Language Archive. (https://archive.mpi.nl/tla/elan)

Gabas, Nilson Junior. 1999. *A Grammar of Karo, Tupi (Brazil)*. UCSB, Department of Linguistics.

Gijn, Rik van. 2010. Middle voice and ideophones, a diachronic connection. *Studies in Language* 34(2). 273–297.

Gordon, Matthew & Rose, Françoise. 2006. Emérillon stress: a phonetic and phonological study. *Anthropological Linguistics* 48(2). 132–168.

Güldemann, Tom. 2008. *Quotative indexes in African languages. A synchronic and diachronic survey* (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 34). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hinton, Leanne & Nichols, Johanna & Ohala, John. 1994. Introduction: sound-symbolic processes. In Hinton, Leanne & Nichols, Johanna & Ohala, John (eds.), *Sound symbolism*, 1–12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide. 2017. Basque ideophones from a typological perspective. *Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique*. Cambridge University Press 62(2). 196-220. (doi:10.1017/cnj.2017.8)

Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide. 2019. Towards a semantic typological classification of motion ideophones: The motion semantic grid*. In Akita, Kimi & Pardeshi, Prashant (eds.), *Iconicity in Language and Literature*, vol. 16, 137-166. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (doi:10.1075/ill.16.07iba) (https://benjamins.com/catalog/ill.16.07iba) (Accessed November 21, 2022.)

Idiatov, Dmitry. 2005. The exceptional morphology of Tura numerals and restrictors: Endoclitics, infixes and pseudowords. *Journal of African Languages and Linguistics* 26(1). (doi:10.1515/jall.2005.26.1.31) (https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jall.2005.26.1.31/html) (Accessed November 14, 2022)

Jacques, Guillaume. 2013. Ideophones in Japhug (Rgyalrong). *Anthropological Linguistics* 55(3). 256-287.

Johansson, Niklas Erben & Anikin, Andrey & Carling, Gerd & Holmer, Arthur. 2020. The typology of sound symbolism: Defining macro-concepts via their semantic and phonetic features. *Linguistic Typology* 24(2). 253-310. (doi:10.1515/lingty-2020-2034)

Kilian-Hatz, Christa. 2001. Universality and diversity: Ideophones from Baka and Kxoe. In Voeltz, F. K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.), *Typological Studies in Language*, vol. 44, 155-163. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (doi:10.1075/tsl.44.13kil) (https://benjamins.com/catalog/tsl.44.13kil) (Accessed July 18, 2023)

Kita, Sotoro. 1997. Two-dimensional semantic analysis of Japanese mimetics. *Linguistics* 35. 379-415.

Kunene, Daniel. 2001. Speaking the act. The ideophone as a linguistic rebel. In Voeltz, F. K. & Kilian-Hatz, C. (eds.), *Ideophones*, 183-191. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Langdon, Margaret. 1994. Noise words in Guaraní. In Hinton, Leanne & Nichols, Johanna & Ohala, John (eds.), *Sound symbolism*, vol. Chapter 7, 94-103. Cambridge University Press.

Levin, Beth. 1993. *English verb classes and alternations: a preliminary investigation*. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide. 2017. Basque ideophones from a typological perspective. *Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique*. Cambridge University Press 62(2). 196-220. (doi:10.1017/cnj.2017.8)

Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide. 2019. Towards a semantic typological classification of motion ideophones: The motion semantic grid*. In Akita, Kimi & Pardeshi, Prashant (eds.), *Iconicity in Language and Literature*, vol. 16, 137-166. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (doi:10.1075/ill.16.07iba) (https://benjamins.com/catalog/ill.16.07iba) (Accessed November 21, 2022.)

Idiatov, Dmitry. 2005. The exceptional morphology of Tura numerals and restrictors: Endoclitics, infixes and pseudowords. *Journal of African Languages and Linguistics* 26(1). (doi:10.1515/jall.2005.26.1.31) (https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jall.2005.26.1.31/html) (Accessed November 14, 2022)

Jacques, Guillaume. 2013. Ideophones in Japhug (Rgyalrong). *Anthropological Linguistics* 55(3). 256-287.

Johansson, Niklas Erben & Anikin, Andrey & Carling, Gerd & Holmer, Arthur. 2020. The typology of sound symbolism: Defining macro-concepts via their semantic and phonetic features. *Linguistic Typology* 24(2). 253-310. (doi:10.1515/lingty-2020-2034)

Kilian-Hatz, Christa. 2001. Universality and diversity: Ideophones from Baka and Kxoe. In Voeltz, F. K. Erhard & Kilian-Hatz, Christa (eds.), *Typological Studies in Language*, vol. 44, 155-163. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (doi:10.1075/tsl.44.13kil) (https://benjamins.com/catalog/tsl.44.13kil) (Accessed July 18, 2023)

Kita, Sotoro. 1997. Two-dimensional semantic analysis of Japanese mimetics. *Linguistics* 35. 379-415.

Kunene, Daniel. 2001. Speaking the act. The ideophone as a linguistic rebel. In Voeltz, F. K. & Kilian-Hatz, C. (eds.), *Ideophones*, 183-191. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Langdon, Margaret. 1994. Noise words in Guaraní. In Hinton, Leanne & Nichols, Johanna & Ohala, John (eds.), *Sound symbolism*, vol. Chapter 7, 94-103. Cambridge University Press.

Levin, Beth. 1993. *English verb classes and alternations: a preliminary investigation*. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Matisoff, James A. 1975. Rhinoglottophilia: the Mysterious Connection between Nasality and Glottality. In Ferguson, Charles A. & Hyman, Larry M. & Ohala, John (eds.), *Nasàlfest*, 265–288. Stanford: Language Universals Project, Department of Linguistics, Stanford University.

Maurel, Didier. 1998. *Eléments de grammaire émérillon*. Paris: A.E.A. (Chantiers Amerindia 1.23).

Maurel, Didier. 2000. *Taila. 1596-1789: deux siècles de relations inter-communautaires teko-kaliña*. Université M.Bloch, Strasbourg II. (Mémoire de Maîtrise d'Ethnologie)

Maurel, Ti'iwan. 1991. *Dzawapinim o'olam tamandua* (Krik Krak). Maripasoula: Association des Amis de l'Ecole élémentaire de Maripasoula.

Maurel, Ti'iwan. 1993. *Wlakala n?wã'e dzowoma'?kom omba'e* (Krik Krak). Maripasoula: Association des Amis de l'Ecole élémentaire de Maripasoula.

Mayer, Mercer. 1969. *Frog, where are you?* (Dial Books for Young Readers). New York: Penguin.

McLean, Bonnie. 2021. Revising an implicational hierarchy for the meanings of ideophones, with special reference to Japonic. *Linguistic Typology*. De Gruyter Mouton 25(3). 507–549. (doi:10.1515/lingty-2020-2063)

Mihas, Elena. 2012. Ideophones in Alto Perené (Arawak) from Eastern Peru. *Studies in Language* 36(2). 300–344. (doi:10.1075/sl.36.2.04mih)

Navet, Eric. 1994. Introduction. In Couchili, Ti'iwan & Maurel, Didier (eds.), *Contes des Indiens émérillon*, 1–11. Paris: Conseil International de la Langue Française.

Newman, Paul. 2001. Are ideophones really as weird and extra-systematic as linguists make them out to be? In Voeltz, F. K. & Kilian-Hatz, C. (eds.), *Ideophones*, 251–258. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Nuckolls, Janis B. 1996. *Sounds like life: sound-symbolic grammar, performance, and cognition in Pastaza Quechua* (Oxford Studies in Anthropological Linguistics 2). New York: Oxford University Press.

Nuckolls, Janis B. 1999. The Case for Sound Symbolism. *Annual Review of Anthropology* 28. 225–252.

Nuckolls, Janis B. 2021. Ideophones in Pastaza Quechua. tsl.44.22nuc. (https://benjamins.com/catalog/tsl.44.22nuc) (Accessed October 12, 2021)

Reiter, Sabine. 2011. *Ideophones in Awetí*. Kiel. Doctoral dissertation, Christian Albrechts University.
Matisoff, James A. 1975. Rhinoglottophilia: the Mysterious Connection between Nasality and Glottality. In Ferguson, Charles A. & Hyman, Larry M. & Ohala, John (eds.), *Nasàlfest*, 265–288. Stanford: Language Universals Project, Department of Linguistics, Stanford University.

Maurel, Didier. 1998. *Eléments de grammaire émérillon*. Paris: A.E.A. (Chantiers Amerindia 1.23).

Maurel, Didier. 2000. *Taila. 1596-1789: deux siècles de relations inter-communautaires teko-kaliña*. Université M.Bloch, Strasbourg II. (Mémoire de Maîtrise d'Ethnologie)

Maurel, Ti'iwan. 1991. *Dzawapinim o'olam tamandua* (Krik Krak). Maripasoula: Association des Amis de l'Ecole élémentaire de Maripasoula.

Maurel, Ti'iwan. 1993. *Wlakala n?wã'e dzowoma'?kom omba'e* (Krik Krak). Maripasoula: Association des Amis de l'Ecole élémentaire de Maripasoula.

Mayer, Mercer. 1969. *Frog, where are you?* (Dial Books for Young Readers). New York: Penguin.

McLean, Bonnie. 2021. Revising an implicational hierarchy for the meanings of ideophones, with special reference to Japonic. *Linguistic Typology*. De Gruyter Mouton 25(3). 507–549. (doi:10.1515/lingty-2020-2063)

Mihas, Elena. 2012. Ideophones in Alto Perené (Arawak) from Eastern Peru. *Studies in Language* 36(2). 300–344. (doi:10.1075/sl.36.2.04mih)

Navet, Eric. 1994. Introduction. In Couchili, Ti'iwan & Maurel, Didier (eds.), *Contes des Indiens émérillon*, 1–11. Paris: Conseil International de la Langue Française.

Newman, Paul. 2001. Are ideophones really as weird and extra-systematic as linguists make them out to be? In Voeltz, F. K. & Kilian-Hatz, C. (eds.), *Ideophones*, 251–258. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Nuckolls, Janis B. 1996. *Sounds like life: sound-symbolic grammar, performance, and cognition in Pastaza Quechua* (Oxford Studies in Anthropological Linguistics 2). New York: Oxford University Press.

Nuckolls, Janis B. 1999. The Case for Sound Symbolism. *Annual Review of Anthropology* 28. 225–252.

Nuckolls, Janis B. 2021. Ideophones in Pastaza Quechua. tsl.44.22nuc. (https://benjamins.com/catalog/tsl.44.22nuc) (Accessed October 12, 2021)

Reiter, Sabine. 2011. *Ideophones in Awetí*. Kiel. Doctoral dissertation, Christian Albrechts University.
Renault-Lescure, Odile & Grenand, Françoise & Navet, Eric. 1987. *Contes amérindiens de Guyane* (Collection Fleuve et Flamme). Paris: Conseil International de la Langue Française.

Rodrigues, Aryon. 1984. Relações internas na família linguística Tupí-Guaraní. *Revista de antropologia* 27-28. 33-53.

Rose, Françoise. 2002. My hammock = I have a hammock. Possessed nouns constituting possessive clauses in Emérillon (Tupi-Guarani). In Cabral, Ana Suelly & Rodrigues, Aryon (eds.), *Línguas Indígenas Brasileiras. Fonologia, Gramática e História. Atas do I Encontro Internacional do GTLI da ANPOLL*, vol. 1, 392-402. Belem, Brésil: CNPQ & Universidade federal do Para.

Rose, Françoise. 2003. *Morphosyntaxe de l'émérillon. Une langue tupi-guarani de Guyane française*. Doctoral dissertation, Université Lumière Lyon II.

Rose, Françoise. 2005. Reduplication in Tupi-Guarani languages: going into opposite directions. In Hurch, Bernhard (ed.), *Studies on Reduplication* (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 28), 351-368. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Rose, Françoise. 2007. Action répétitive et action répétée : aspect et pluralité verbale dans la réduplication en émérillon. *Faits de Langues* 29 (La réduplication). 125-143. (Ed. Bibliothèque Faits de Langues)

Rose, Françoise. 2008. A typological overview of Emerillon, a Tupi-Guarani language from French Guiana. *Linguistic Typology* 12(3). 431-460.

Rose, Françoise. 2009. A hierarchical indexation system: the example of Emerillon (Teko). In Epps, Patience & Arkhipov, Alexander (eds.), *New Challenges in Typology. Transcending the Borders and Refining the Distinctions* (Trends in Linguistics), 63-83. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Rose, Françoise. 2011. *Grammaire de l'émérillon teko, une langue tupi-guarani de Guyane française* (Langues et Sociétés d'Amérique Traditionnelle 10). Louvain: Peeters.

Rose, Françoise. 2018. *Teko lexical and textual Toolbox database*.

Rose, Françoise. 2023. Word classes in Mawetí-Guaraní languages. *The Oxford Handbook of Word Classes* (Oxford Handbooks). Oxford University Press.

Rose, Françoise & Vanhove, Martine. 2007. Discours rapporté direct et prosodie en émérillon et en bedja. Nantes. (Presented at the Colloque CerLiCO Grammaire et Prosodie, Nantes)
Renault-Lescure, Odile & Grenand, Françoise & Navet, Eric. 1987. *Contes amérindiens de Guyane* (Collection Fleuve et Flamme). Paris: Conseil International de la Langue Française.

Rodrigues, Aryon. 1984. Relações internas na família linguística Tupí-Guaraní. *Revista de antropologia* 27-28. 33-53.

Rose, Françoise. 2002. My hammock = I have a hammock. Possessed nouns constituting possessive clauses in Emérillon (Tupi-Guarani). In Cabral, Ana Suelly & Rodrigues, Aryon (eds.), *Línguas Indígenas Brasileiras. Fonologia, Gramática e História. Atas do I Encontro Internacional do GTLI da ANPOLL*, vol. 1, 392-402. Belem, Brésil: CNPQ & Universidade federal do Para.

Rose, Françoise. 2003. *Morphosyntaxe de l'émérillon. Une langue tupi-guarani de Guyane française*. Doctoral dissertation, Université Lumière Lyon II.

Rose, Françoise. 2005. Reduplication in Tupi-Guarani languages: going into opposite directions. In Hurch, Bernhard (ed.), *Studies on Reduplication* (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 28), 351-368. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Rose, Françoise. 2007. Action répétitive et action répétée : aspect et pluralité verbale dans la réduplication en émérillon. *Faits de Langues* 29 (La réduplication). 125-143. (Ed. Bibliothèque Faits de Langues)

Rose, Françoise. 2008. A typological overview of Emerillon, a Tupi-Guarani language from French Guiana. *Linguistic Typology* 12(3). 431-460.

Rose, Françoise. 2009. A hierarchical indexation system: the example of Emerillon (Teko). In Epps, Patience & Arkhipov, Alexander (eds.), *New Challenges in Typology. Transcending the Borders and Refining the Distinctions* (Trends in Linguistics), 63-83. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Rose, Françoise. 2011. *Grammaire de l'émérillon teko, une langue tupi-guarani de Guyane française* (Langues et Sociétés d'Amérique Traditionnelle 10). Louvain: Peeters.

Rose, Françoise. 2018. *Teko lexical and textual Toolbox database*.

Rose, Françoise. 2023. Word classes in Mawetí-Guaraní languages. *The Oxford Handbook of Word Classes* (Oxford Handbooks). Oxford University Press.

Rose, Françoise & Vanhove, Martine. 2007. Discours rapporté direct et prosodie en émérillon et en bedja. Nantes. (Presented at the Colloque CerLiCO Grammaire et Prosodie, Nantes)
Samarin, William. 2001. Testing hypotheses about African ideophones. In Voeltz, F. K. & Kilian-Hatz, C. (eds.), *Ideophones*, 321–337. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Smoll, Laetitia I. 2014. *Me:RuRu, Foku, and tSitowiS: An analysis of ideophones in Katuena (Tunayana)*. Master Thesis, Universiteit Leiden.

Talmy, Leonard. 2000. *Toward a cognitive semantics*. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Tufvesson, Sylvia. 2011. Analogy-making in the Semai Sensory World. *The Senses and Society* 6(1). 86–95. (doi:10.2752/174589311X12893982233876)

van der Hulst, Harry & van de Weijer, Jeroen. 2011. Vowel harmony. In Goldsmith, John A. (ed.), *The Handbook of Phonological Theory*, 495–534. John Wiley & Sons.

CONTACT

francoise.rose@univ-lyon2.fr
Samarin, William. 2001. Testing hypotheses about African ideophones. In Voeltz, F. K. & Kilian-Hatz, C. (eds.), *Ideophones*, 321–337. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Smoll, Laetitia I. 2014. *Me:RuRu, Foku, and tSitowiS: An analysis of ideophones in Katuena (Tunayana)*. Master Thesis, Universiteit Leiden.

Talmy, Leonard. 2000. *Toward a cognitive semantics*. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Tufvesson, Sylvia. 2011. Analogy-making in the Semai Sensory World. *The Senses and Society* 6(1). 86–95. (doi:10.2752/174589311X12893982233876)

van der Hulst, Harry & van de Weijer, Jeroen. 2011. Vowel harmony. In Goldsmith, John A. (ed.), *The Handbook of Phonological Theory*, 495–534. John Wiley & Sons.

CONTACT

francoise.rose@univ-lyon2.fr