"For example, the opposition between acute and grave phonemes has the capacity to suggest an image of bright and dark, of pointed and rounded, of thin and thick, of light and heavy, etc"
About this Quote
Jakobson is doing something sly here: he takes the driest possible object - a “phoneme,” the supposedly neutral unit of sound - and shows how quickly it turns into a theater of perception. The technical opposition he names (acute vs. grave) is a linguist’s way of sorting sounds by spectral energy: “acute” tends to be higher, sharper, more concentrated; “grave” lower, fuller, more diffuse. Then comes the pivot: these acoustic distinctions don’t stay in the ear. They “suggest an image” that spills into vision, touch, even weight.
The intent isn’t mystical synesthesia; it’s a structuralist claim about how humans naturally map differences across sensory domains. Jakobson is arguing that language is primed for metaphor before metaphor becomes a literary device. The subtext is a rebuttal to the idea that sound symbolism is childish or incidental. If basic contrasts in speech can reliably cue “bright/dark” or “thin/thick,” then poetry, branding, and political slogans aren’t merely decorating meaning - they’re exploiting built-in cognitive shortcuts.
Context matters: mid-20th-century linguistics was fighting over whether language is an abstract code or a material, embodied system. Jakobson, moving between Russian formalism, Prague School phonology, and postwar American academia, consistently pushed against sterile formalism. This line reads like a lab note that doubles as a manifesto: the smallest elements of speech already carry an organized, persuasive sensuousness. Sound doesn’t just deliver meaning; it stages it.
The intent isn’t mystical synesthesia; it’s a structuralist claim about how humans naturally map differences across sensory domains. Jakobson is arguing that language is primed for metaphor before metaphor becomes a literary device. The subtext is a rebuttal to the idea that sound symbolism is childish or incidental. If basic contrasts in speech can reliably cue “bright/dark” or “thin/thick,” then poetry, branding, and political slogans aren’t merely decorating meaning - they’re exploiting built-in cognitive shortcuts.
Context matters: mid-20th-century linguistics was fighting over whether language is an abstract code or a material, embodied system. Jakobson, moving between Russian formalism, Prague School phonology, and postwar American academia, consistently pushed against sterile formalism. This line reads like a lab note that doubles as a manifesto: the smallest elements of speech already carry an organized, persuasive sensuousness. Sound doesn’t just deliver meaning; it stages it.
Quote Details
| Topic | Poetry |
|---|
More Quotes by Roman
Add to List
