When you punch someone or fire a gun, it does not make this noise. Ever. Unless live in a comic.
Is it wrong to hate this?
The definition is:
“A word that imitates or suggests the source of the sound that it describes“
It has bugged me for years. Who actually thought this up? The reason I ask is because I think it is highly flawed.
Sure throw at me the examples of ‘meow‘ or ‘quack‘ but I’ll return with ‘squelch‘. ”What’s up with squelch? It’s the sound I make when I step in wet mud.”
Sure many people think it is, but the definition of squelch also means to silence or supress, and when you silence something it doesn’t have a sound really does it?
Which begs the question then – which came first?
Also ‘bark‘ is apparently another example. Apparently the noise a dog makes, but also the outer layer of a tree. Too many double meanings attributed to some of these words make me think ‘are we not attributing already existing words to the sound of something simply because of one persons personal perception which has then influenced others?’. Personally I think ‘bark’ is a flimsy one anyway because other people think a dog goes ‘woof‘, but then really you have to bring into the argument the size of the dog don’t you? Sure a rottweiler or an alsation may ‘woof‘ or ‘bark‘ but a chihuahua? ‘Arf‘ would possibly be more appropriate but some people think that is one of the varying sounds of laughter.
As a writer onomatopoeia bugs me because I think it is purely subjective but the language is possibly too far gone for my crazy idea to ever come to pass to do away with the notion. I mean kids are taught that dogs bark and woof for God’s sake. I’ve never heard a dog form the letters ‘b’ or ‘f’ EVER, and I defy anyone reading this to prove otherwise. They’re good at w’s and o’s. In fact, in saying that I now want to say that I dog doesn’t bark or woof, but uses varying rough (another bloody noise a dog makes!) forms of the word ‘wow‘ to communicate. There I’ve done it. If ever I write a story about a viscious Kujo-like dog I’m going to use the line,
“As the last embers of the campfire died away, they heard it. Cutting through the trees like the cruel blade of a stalking assassin came the long and painful wow of Derek The Angry Dog.”
Y’see? Your howl or bark, is my wow. Saying ‘wow’ to express elated surprise should now be done away with from here on in as this is the noise a dog makes. I’ve suggested that a dog makes this noise, so surely, by the laws of onomatopoeia this should now be put into general use? If so, here’s some more suggestions:
Birds go mirrip, they don’t cheap or chirrup.
There’s no ‘e’ in the noise a cat makes, it is now simply ‘mow‘ (pronounced like cow, not the one we use to cut grass).
Squelch? I tend to ‘fthlip’ when I step in wet mud.
Please tell me I’m not alone in this and going utterly mental people. I’m trying to prove a point that not only do people hear things differently, but alot of the times like with ‘bark’ and ‘squelch’ there are other meanings which are far far removed from their use in onomatopoeia.
Obviously I was taking some things to extremes in terms of sound imitation, but the suggestive side of the subject means no one word should be specifically attributed. I prefer when writing to generate my own sounds for words, not lump in with the rest of the world and say I got splashed by a puddle.
Puddles aren’t deep enough to splash in for a start. I know this because I apparently make a splash noise when I jump into a swimming pool too. Puddles and swimming pools greatly differ in depth yet the sound is apparently the same? Puddles possibly ‘tlssh‘ and jumping into swimming pools possibly make a ‘dutlish‘ noise.
I’m off again. I need a lie down.
Bottom line is – Onomatopoeia – I don’t like you. My friends shouldn’t like you either.
I’ll shush now.
Or ssh.
Or sshhhsssssssh.
