Talk:Ideophone

message: Perhaps mention should be made of the fact that ideophones are often phonetically different from ordinary words. Among other things, for example, they have tones, e.g. whoops! (rising tone), boing! (level tone), aha! (high-low fall on the second syllable), and so on. Kanjuzi (talk) 18:27, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Tones of Ideophones

message: How is this different from onomatopoeia? This article does reference onomatopoeia, but it doesn't distinguish itself from onomatopoeia. There should not exist a separate English article for every language's word for onomatopoeia.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.71.211.71 (talk) 01:10, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It does distinguish ideophones from onomatopoeia. As it says, ideophones representing sounds (like "splash!") are only one type; but there are other types too, such as Chichewa dzandi-dzandi, representing the wobbly way someone walks when drunk, or D'oh!, representing the idea that someone has done something unusually stupid. Kanjuzi (talk) 05:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Onomatopoeia vs Ideophones

message: I suspect English has at least a few ideophones that are not onomatopoeic.  Potential examples that come to mind are words like zigzag, which uses its sound and possibly even the shape of the letter Z to suggest back and forth motion, even though zigzagging things don't make a similar sound.  Others are lickety-split and hoity-toity, in which the sounds evoke a sense of quickness and pompousness, respectively, though don't seem to be imitations of any sounds made by what they describe.  Rriegs (talk) 21:34, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Good examples. Kanjuzi (talk) 05:04, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-(less?)-onomatopoeic English ideophones  

message: it might be a good idea to delete this sentence "they are claimed to be relatively uncommon in Western languages".
This is quite outdated given current research on ideophones. There are detailed studies about Estonian, Basque, and Turkish ideophones that demostrated that some "Western" languages do have very rich ideophone inventories.
Just a few references....
Jendraschek, Gerd. 2001. Semantic and structural properties of Turkish ideophones. Turkic Languages 5: 88-103.
Jendraschek, Gerd. 2002. The struggle against monolingualism. Journal of Universal Language 3:55-75.
Jendraschek, Gerd. 2002. Semantische Eigenschaften von Ideophonen im Türkischen. München: LINCOM Europa (Edition Linguistik, 30).
Mikone, E. 2001. Ideophones in the Balto-Finnic languages. F.K. Erhard Voeltz and Christa Kilian-Hatz (eds.). Ideophones. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. 2017. Basque ideophones from a typological perspective. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / Revue canadienne de linguistique 62.2: 1-21. 
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. 2019. Towards a semantic typological classification of motion ideophones: The motion semantic grid. K. Akita & P. Pardeshi (eds.), Ideophones, Mimetics, and Expressives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 137-166.
Iia-iia (talk) 00:12, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Sourcing the claim would be better than removing it. 46.114.37.186 (talk) 08:41, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  ideophones in Western languages 

message: is this necessary? no other page I've seen does this. Binarycat64 (talk) 00:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  examples subheaders are links to languages 

message: It could be interesting to discuss why reduplication is so common for ideophones - is the sense of fun important? Cerulean Depths (talk) 22:04, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reduplication