Specializations > Phonetics and Phonology

Phonosemantics

<< < (2/16) > >>

Pramod Kumar Agrawal:
I am trying to communicate the site given by you. In the today's material world, everything is possible. Searching of a proper journal is a difficult task. Many journals do not demand the publication fees, but demand membership fees for one year. Some of them have very strict copyright provisions. I am working on it.
I will need one more favor from your side. For a while, please forget about the theory. Look at the 'experimental results'. Kindly let me know if these results are convincing or not. Whether the semantic values assigned by me satisfy the meaning of the words or not. If yes ! up to what extend.

freknu:
*cough* http://www.linguisticsociety.org/

And no, the experiments are not convincing in the least — because these are not experiments, and neither provide nor are based on any methodology.

Pramod Kumar Agrawal:
In pera no 6, I have clearly explained the method of deriving the meaning of any word. The semantic values are taken from pera no 5. Which are derived from the theory explained in pera no 2, 3, and 4.
I feel convincing with the result of the experiment “ It /ɪt/ = visible /ɪ/ occupying /t/ {occupying the visible}”. Are you not?
According to the phonosemantics, languages are made of vocal gestures and every word (composition of gestures) has some philosophical meaning. All gestures support some specific universal meaning, which can be understood without learning. Laughing and crying are examples. These meanings are allotted by nature and nature can be analysed in terms of phonemes as shown in the theory.

freknu:
HOW and FROM WHAT did you derive the semantic values? You have merely plucked arbitrary values from thin air, providing NO methology whatsoever.

Chapter 2-4 is nothing but nonsense, and is neither methodology nor evidence for anything. Arbitrary values that cannot be taken seriously.

*cough* http://www.linguisticsociety.org/


--- Quote from: Pramod Kumar Agrawal on April 16, 2014, 10:25:15 PM ---According to the phonosemantics, languages are made of vocal gestures and every word (composition of gestures) has some philosophical meaning. All gestures support some specific universal meaning, which can be understood without learning. Laughing and crying are examples. These meanings are allotted by nature and nature can be analysed in terms of phonemes as shown in the theory.
--- End quote ---

Then your "hypothesis" is not scientific.

Pramod Kumar Agrawal:
I was not intending to discuss the theory. I have already written ... “For a while, please forget about the theory”. I was just asking whether the example {It /ɪt/ = visible /ɪ/ occupying /t/ (occupying the visible)} is convincing or not? If you say no, It is OK for me.
I believe that while discussing anything, the word ‘nonsense’ should be avoided.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version