How arbitrary is language？

Abstract： To a large degree，language is arbitrary. But there are exceptions to prove that language is not always arbitrary. However，non-arbitrariness is itself inevitably arbitrary. In fact，arbitrariness and non-arbitrariness work together to complete a language. It seems that they contradict to each other，but they actually coexist as a whole in the same unity.

Key words： arbitrary； non-arbitrariness； language

How arbitrary is language？ To a large degree，language is arbitrary. Saussure puts in his book，“The bond between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary”. According to Saussure，Arbitrariness means “There is generally no relationship between the form of a word and its meaning”.

To better explain this，look at the example “book” in English. The word “book” is used to signify a book in the real world as we all understand. However，we cannot clearly explain why a book is signified by a word “book /buk/” in English. Looking at the word form “book” and we find the arrangement of words （b-o-o-k） or the pronunciation “/buk/” shows no visual or perceptible characters of a real book. If we name the book “cat” and name the cat “book”，it is still acceptable. Both the two words “cat” and “book” are just “symbols” we create to address the entity we want to refer to. In this sense，we can also create other names for the same entity. That is why different languages have different words to signify a book （e.g. “book” in English，“l(fā)ivre” in French，“書” in Chinese ），and there is no reason to say that “l(fā)ivre” is more preferable to “book” as they are both equally “symbols”. So there is no intrinsic connection between the word form and its meaning.

But there are exceptions to prove that language is not always arbitrary，that is，non-arbitrariness in language，represented by onomatopoetic words and iconicity.

Onomatopoetic words （onomatopoeia，ideophones），generally resemble sounds made by humans，animals and actions on a natural basis，such as “hiss” （long sound to show disapproval） in English，“mio” （cry characteristic of a cat） in French，“呼呼” （sound of blowing wind） in Chinese. Phonologically，onomatopoetic words signify sounds and bear a natural relationship between its phonological shape and its meaning.

Iconicity，which means “the form， length， complexity， or interrelationship of elements in a linguistic representation reflects the form， length， complexity， or interrelation of elements in the concept， experience， or communicate strategy that that representation encodes.”（Newmeyer，1998） Iconicity generally refers to the re-semblance between the form of a word and its referent.

A typical example is hieroglyph （i.e. iconic or graphic language and words），like Chinese characters whose forms resemble real entities in the world. For example，“田” （plot，field） shows the vivid image of divided pieces of the field in the countryside； “傘” （umbrella） looks like a real umbrella unfolded with cover，ribs and handle. When we look at the words，we can manage to guess and understand its meaning. Obviously there is visual connection between the meaning of the word and its iconic form.

Morphologically，iconicity also exists in word-forming process，such as inflection，reduplication，compounding，etc. Someone who dances is called “dancer”，someone who sings is called a “singer”，then we can conclude that a “teacher” is somebody who teaches and a “painter” is somebody who paints. The word “X-er” corresponds to a certain kind of people who conducts the action implied by the stem “X”. In other languages are examples of reduplication，as in Thai，“dek7-dek7” （children） bears plural meaning in comparison with “dek7” （child） by reduplication of morphemes，so the form of the word represents some meaning of its signified entity. Compounding is easily found in French as the word “grand-pere” （grandfather） takes compounded meaning of two single words which can be seen by its form.

However，non-arbitrariness is itself inevitably arbitrary. The supporters （e.g. affixes，ways of word-formation） used to form onomatopoeia or iconicity are also “signifiers” created by human beings. That is why English use suffix “-s” to indicate plural form （e.g. child-children） whereas Thai use reduplication （dek7 ： child -- dek7 dek7 ： children），both of which are “artificial signifiers of the plural form of a word”.

Syntactically，arbitrariness is also applicable. Different languages have different ways to organize words into a sentence. But we should also realize the existence of non-arbitrariness，as in many languages the rules of syntax are somehow similar. The division of word categories and the words’ order and positions follow certain rules，and there is a certain sequence of clauses that can be applied to most languages.

From the previous discussion， we can draw the conclusion that arbitrariness and non-arbitrariness work together to complete a language. It seems that they contradict to each other，but they actually coexist as a whole in the same unity.

References

[1]De Saussure，F(xiàn)erdinand. Course in General Linguistics[M].McGrao-Hill Book Company，2001，p67

[2]Newmeyer， Frederich J. Language Form and Language Function[M]. Cambridge： The MIT Press， 1988，p114

[3]YANG Guang-yuan，SHI Xian-jian，The Formation of Thai Compound Words，Journal of Yunnan Nationalities University （social sciences edition），2010，27（1），p134

Note of contributor：

Zhou Qi （1992.04.09～），undergraduate student of school of foreign Languages，Shandong University，Jinan. She is from Jinan city of Shandong province of china. Her research field is British and American literature.