Olfactory language: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m →Olfactory language: removing empty section |
m Open access bot: hdl updated in citation with #oabot. |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Language associated with the sense of smell}} |
|||
[[File:Wine Aroma Wheel.jpg|thumb|English wine aroma terms grouped into categories and subcategories.]] |
[[File:Wine Aroma Wheel.jpg|thumb|English wine aroma terms grouped into categories and subcategories.]] |
||
'''Olfactory language''' refers to [[language]] associated with the sense of [[Olfaction|smell]]. It involves the naming and categorisation of [[Odor|odours]] by humans according to each odour's perceived source or attributes. The study of olfactory language is part of the field of [[linguistics]] and is distinct from the study of [[semiochemical|semiochemical communication]], which involves communication between organisms using chemical substances detected through olfaction. |
'''Olfactory language''' refers to [[language]] associated with the sense of [[Olfaction|smell]]. It involves the naming and categorisation of [[Odor|odours]] by humans according to each odour's perceived source or attributes. The study of olfactory language is part of the field of [[linguistics]] and is distinct from the study of [[semiochemical|semiochemical communication]], which involves communication between organisms using chemical substances detected through olfaction. |
||
==Cross-linguistic variation== |
|||
==Variation cross-linguistically== |
|||
=== Olfactory perception and identification === |
=== Olfactory perception and identification === |
||
Different [[Speech community|speech communities]] tend to display differences in both the perception and linguistic categorisation of odours. In general, Europeans find it harder to identify odours than hunter-gatherer communities.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Olofsson|first1=JK|last2=Gottfried|first2=JA|date=2015|title=The muted sense: neurocognitive limitations of olfactory language|journal=Trends in Cognitive Sciences|volume=19|issue=6|pages=314–321|doi=10.1016/j.tics.2015.04.007|pmid=25979848|pmc=4457599|issn=1364-6613}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Majid|first1=A|last2=Kruspe|first2=N|date=2018|title=Hunter-gatherer olfaction is special|journal=Current Biology|volume=28|issue=3|pages=409–413.e2|doi=10.1016/j.cub.2017.12.014|pmid=29358070|s2cid=7661728|issn=0960-9822}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last1=Majid|first1=A|last2=Burenhult|first2=N|date=2014|title=Odors are expressible in language, as long as you speak the right language|url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24355816/#:~:text=Cross%2Dcultural%20research%20suggests%20that,odors%20play%20a%20larger%20role.&text=Our%20findings%20show%20that%20the,you%20speak%20the%20right%20language.|journal=Cognition|volume=130|issue=2|pages=266–270|doi=10.1016/j.cognition.2013.11.004|pmid=24355816|hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-0014-9D63-D|s2cid=16257849|issn=0010-0277|access-date=25 August 2020| |
Different [[Speech community|speech communities]] tend to display differences in both the perception and linguistic categorisation of odours. In general, Europeans find it harder to identify odours than hunter-gatherer communities.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Olofsson|first1=JK|last2=Gottfried|first2=JA|date=2015|title=The muted sense: neurocognitive limitations of olfactory language|journal=Trends in Cognitive Sciences|volume=19|issue=6|pages=314–321|doi=10.1016/j.tics.2015.04.007|pmid=25979848|pmc=4457599|issn=1364-6613}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Majid|first1=A|last2=Kruspe|first2=N|date=2018|title=Hunter-gatherer olfaction is special|journal=Current Biology|volume=28|issue=3|pages=409–413.e2|doi=10.1016/j.cub.2017.12.014|pmid=29358070|s2cid=7661728|issn=0960-9822|doi-access=free|hdl=21.11116/0000-0000-2A33-8|hdl-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last1=Majid|first1=A|last2=Burenhult|first2=N|date=2014|title=Odors are expressible in language, as long as you speak the right language|url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24355816/#:~:text=Cross%2Dcultural%20research%20suggests%20that,odors%20play%20a%20larger%20role.&text=Our%20findings%20show%20that%20the,you%20speak%20the%20right%20language.|journal=Cognition|volume=130|issue=2|pages=266–270|doi=10.1016/j.cognition.2013.11.004|pmid=24355816|hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-0014-9D63-D|s2cid=16257849|issn=0010-0277|access-date=25 August 2020|hdl-access=free}}</ref> The ease with which odours are identified by speakers is related to the primary type of olfactory vocabulary used in their speech community. Some speech communities, including [[Jahai language|Jahai]]- and Thai-speaking hunter-gatherers, mostly use dedicated abstract vocabulary for referring to odour qualities, while others, such as Dutch and English speakers, mostly use concrete terms that identify the source itself.<ref name="abstraction">{{cite journal|first1=A|last1=Majid| last2=Burenhult |first2=N|last3=Stensmyr |first3=M| last4=de Valk|first4=J| last5=Hansson| first5=BS|date=2018|title=Olfactory language and abstraction across cultures|journal=Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences|volume=373|issue=1752|pages=20170139|doi=10.1098/rstb.2017.0139|pmid=29915007|pmc=6015838}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite journal|last1=de Valk|first1=JM|last2=Wnuk|first2=E|last3=Huisman|first3=JLA|last4=Majid|first4=A|date=2016|title=Odor–color associations differ with verbal descriptors for odors: A comparison of three linguistically diverse groups|journal=Psychonomic Bulletin & Review|volume=24|issue=4|pages=1171–1179|doi=10.3758/s13423-016-1179-2|pmid=27783225|pmc=5570805|issn=1069-9384}}</ref> When presented with common odours and asked to name them, Jahai speakers are likely to use the same abstract descriptor and answer more quickly, while English and Dutch speakers tend to take longer to answer and use a more diverse range of mostly concrete descriptors, suggesting that abstract and concrete odour names are encoded differently.<ref name=":2" /><ref name="abstraction" /> The nature of odour-colour associations also differs between speech communities based on their vocabulary. Dutch speakers who use concrete terms associate a particular odour with the colour of its source (e.g., banana odour associated with the colour yellow), while Maniq and Thai speakers who use abstract terminology do not show consistent odour-colour associations.<ref name=":3" /> |
||
===Olfactory metaphor=== |
===Olfactory metaphor=== |
||
Cross-linguistically, olfactory metaphor is traditionally thought to be the least important of all the senses, especially when compared to visual or auditory metaphors,<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|last=Sweetser, E|title=From etymology to pragmatics : metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure|date=2002|publisher=Peking University Press|isbn=978-7-301-05354-6 |
Cross-linguistically, olfactory metaphor is traditionally thought to be the least important of all the senses, especially when compared to visual or auditory metaphors,<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|last=Sweetser, E|title=From etymology to pragmatics : metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure|date=2002|publisher=Peking University Press|isbn=978-7-301-05354-6|pages=37|oclc=51718018}}</ref> although emerging research suggests the phenomenon is more common than previously thought.<ref name=":1">{{cite journal|last1=O’Meara|first1=C|last2=Majid|first2=A|year=2020|title=Anger stinks in Seri: Olfactory metaphor in a lesser-described language|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339337680|journal=Cognitive Linguistics|volume=31|issue=3|pages=367–391|doi=10.1515/cog-2017-0100|s2cid=214002902|access-date=25 August 2020|doi-access=free}}</ref> In English, olfactory metaphors with negative connotations are often used to describe bad character ("he's a stinker") or the detection of bad qualities ("I smell something fishy about this deal").<ref name=":0" /> In the [[Seri language]], olfactory metaphor and [[metonymy]] are salient features. One example is the expression ''hiisax cheemt iha'' ("I am angry"), literally 'my.spirit stinks (Declarative)'.<ref name=":1" /> |
||
==Variation within languages== |
==Variation within languages== |
||
Different populations speaking the same language and sharing cultural traditions may still display varied perceptions of an odour, based on its prevalence and most common source in each location. For example, one study showed that French speakers in Quebec find the scent of [[wintergreen]] more pleasant and edible than speakers in France.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ferdenzi |first1=C| last2=Joussain |first2=P| last3=Digard |first3=B| last4=Luneau |first4=L| last5=Djordjevic |first5=J| last6=Bensafi |first6=M|date=2016 |title=Individual differences in verbal and non-verbal affective responses to smells: Influence of odor label across cultures|url=https://academic.oup.com/chemse/article/42/1/37/2503226 |journal=Chemical Senses |volume=42 |issue=1 |pages=37–46 |doi=10.1093/chemse/bjw098 |pmid=27655940|s2cid=28441863|access-date=18 August 2020}}</ref> This is because the odour is commonly used in candies and sodas in North America, while in Europe it is used mainly in medicinal products. However, providing concrete names of the source of the odours caused cultural differences in responses to decrease or disappear, suggesting that providing more linguistic information about an odour tends to make its perception more salient in the mind of the smeller. |
Different populations speaking the same language and sharing cultural traditions may still display varied perceptions of an odour, based on its prevalence and most common source in each location. For example, one study showed that French speakers in Quebec find the scent of [[wintergreen]] more pleasant and edible than speakers in France.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ferdenzi |first1=C| last2=Joussain |first2=P| last3=Digard |first3=B| last4=Luneau |first4=L| last5=Djordjevic |first5=J| last6=Bensafi |first6=M|date=2016 |title=Individual differences in verbal and non-verbal affective responses to smells: Influence of odor label across cultures|url=https://academic.oup.com/chemse/article/42/1/37/2503226 |journal=Chemical Senses |volume=42 |issue=1 |pages=37–46 |doi=10.1093/chemse/bjw098 |pmid=27655940|s2cid=28441863|access-date=18 August 2020|doi-access=free }}</ref> This is because the odour is commonly used in candies and sodas in North America, while in Europe it is used mainly in medicinal products. However, providing concrete names of the source of the odours caused cultural differences in responses to decrease or disappear, suggesting that providing more linguistic information about an odour tends to make its perception more salient in the mind of the smeller. |
||
==Clinical applications== |
==Clinical applications== |
||
In a clinical setting, patients may undergo olfactory tests to aid in the diagnosis of mental disorders.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Tekeli |first1=H|last2=Altundağ| first2=A| last3=Salihoğlu |first3=M| last4=Cayönü |first4=M |last5=Kendirli |first5=MT|date=2013 |title=The applicability of the "Sniffin' Sticks" olfactory test in a Turkish population |journal=Medical Science Monitor |volume=19 |
In a clinical setting, patients may undergo olfactory tests to aid in the diagnosis of mental disorders.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Tekeli |first1=H|last2=Altundağ| first2=A| last3=Salihoğlu |first3=M| last4=Cayönü |first4=M |last5=Kendirli |first5=MT|date=2013 |title=The applicability of the "Sniffin' Sticks" olfactory test in a Turkish population |journal=Medical Science Monitor |volume=19 |pages=1221–1226 |doi=10.12659/MSM.889838 |pmid=24382345|pmc=3891317}}</ref> A common test involves the use of "Sniffin' Sticks", a set of marker pens imbued with different scents at varying dilutions.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hummel |first1=T| last2=Sekinger |first2=B |last3=Wolf |first3=SR| last4=Pauli |first4=E |last5=Kobal| first5=G |date=1997 |title='Sniffin' sticks': olfactory performance assessed by the combined testing of odor identification, odor discrimination and olfactory threshold |journal=Chemical Senses |volume=22 |issue=1 |pages=39–52 |doi=10.1093/chemse/22.1.39 |pmid=9056084|doi-access=free }}</ref> Sniffin' Sticks are used both for diagnosis and for research into olfaction, including olfactory language.<ref name="abstraction"/> Due to linguistic variation across speech communities, the Sniffin' Sticks test must be validated for each country in which medical professionals wish to use it for diagnosis.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Neumann|first1= C| last2=Tsioulos|first2=K| last3=Merkonidis| first3=C| last4=Salam| first4=M| last5=Clark| first5=A| last6=Philpott|first6=C |date=2012 |title=Validation study of the "Sniffin' Sticks" olfactory test in a British population: a preliminary communication |journal=Clinical Otolaryngology |volume=37 |issue= 1|pages=32–27 |doi=10.1111/j.1749-4486.2012.02431.x |pmid= 22433135|s2cid= 2982764}}</ref> Rather than using a literal translation of scent descriptors, researchers validating the test in a new country may need to change the translated descriptors to more culturally-appropriate terms for the speech community in question. For example, researchers validating the Sniffin' Sticks test for the Portuguese population changed the original translation of the [[grapefruit]] scent descriptor, ''toranja'', to the Portuguese word for [[Orange (fruit)|orange]], ''laranja''.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Ribeiro|first1=JC|last2=Simões|first2=J|last3=Silva|first3=F|last4=Silva|first4=ED|last5=Hummel|first5=C|last6=Hummel|first6=T|last7=Paiva|first7=A|date=2016|title=Cultural adaptation of the Portuguese version of the "Sniffin' Sticks" smell test: reliability, validity, and normative data|journal=PLOS ONE|volume=11|issue=2|pages=e0148937|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0148937|pmid=26863023|pmc=4749276|bibcode=2016PLoSO..1148937R|issn=1932-6203|doi-access=free }}</ref> This is because grapefruit are not commonly eaten in Portugal, which resulted in participant familiarity falling below the benchmark of 75%. Altering lesser known descriptors such as "grapefruit" to less literal but more culturally-relevant translations increased familiarity to within the range expected for healthy populations. This validated the Sniffin' Sticks test for the Portuguese population without requiring the scents themselves to be altered. |
||
== See also == |
== See also == |
||
Latest revision as of 00:09, 18 August 2023
Olfactory language refers to language associated with the sense of smell. It involves the naming and categorisation of odours by humans according to each odour's perceived source or attributes. The study of olfactory language is part of the field of linguistics and is distinct from the study of semiochemical communication, which involves communication between organisms using chemical substances detected through olfaction.
Cross-linguistic variation
[edit]Olfactory perception and identification
[edit]Different speech communities tend to display differences in both the perception and linguistic categorisation of odours. In general, Europeans find it harder to identify odours than hunter-gatherer communities.[1][2][3] The ease with which odours are identified by speakers is related to the primary type of olfactory vocabulary used in their speech community. Some speech communities, including Jahai- and Thai-speaking hunter-gatherers, mostly use dedicated abstract vocabulary for referring to odour qualities, while others, such as Dutch and English speakers, mostly use concrete terms that identify the source itself.[4][5] When presented with common odours and asked to name them, Jahai speakers are likely to use the same abstract descriptor and answer more quickly, while English and Dutch speakers tend to take longer to answer and use a more diverse range of mostly concrete descriptors, suggesting that abstract and concrete odour names are encoded differently.[3][4] The nature of odour-colour associations also differs between speech communities based on their vocabulary. Dutch speakers who use concrete terms associate a particular odour with the colour of its source (e.g., banana odour associated with the colour yellow), while Maniq and Thai speakers who use abstract terminology do not show consistent odour-colour associations.[5]
Olfactory metaphor
[edit]Cross-linguistically, olfactory metaphor is traditionally thought to be the least important of all the senses, especially when compared to visual or auditory metaphors,[6] although emerging research suggests the phenomenon is more common than previously thought.[7] In English, olfactory metaphors with negative connotations are often used to describe bad character ("he's a stinker") or the detection of bad qualities ("I smell something fishy about this deal").[6] In the Seri language, olfactory metaphor and metonymy are salient features. One example is the expression hiisax cheemt iha ("I am angry"), literally 'my.spirit stinks (Declarative)'.[7]
Variation within languages
[edit]Different populations speaking the same language and sharing cultural traditions may still display varied perceptions of an odour, based on its prevalence and most common source in each location. For example, one study showed that French speakers in Quebec find the scent of wintergreen more pleasant and edible than speakers in France.[8] This is because the odour is commonly used in candies and sodas in North America, while in Europe it is used mainly in medicinal products. However, providing concrete names of the source of the odours caused cultural differences in responses to decrease or disappear, suggesting that providing more linguistic information about an odour tends to make its perception more salient in the mind of the smeller.
Clinical applications
[edit]In a clinical setting, patients may undergo olfactory tests to aid in the diagnosis of mental disorders.[9] A common test involves the use of "Sniffin' Sticks", a set of marker pens imbued with different scents at varying dilutions.[10] Sniffin' Sticks are used both for diagnosis and for research into olfaction, including olfactory language.[4] Due to linguistic variation across speech communities, the Sniffin' Sticks test must be validated for each country in which medical professionals wish to use it for diagnosis.[11] Rather than using a literal translation of scent descriptors, researchers validating the test in a new country may need to change the translated descriptors to more culturally-appropriate terms for the speech community in question. For example, researchers validating the Sniffin' Sticks test for the Portuguese population changed the original translation of the grapefruit scent descriptor, toranja, to the Portuguese word for orange, laranja.[12] This is because grapefruit are not commonly eaten in Portugal, which resulted in participant familiarity falling below the benchmark of 75%. Altering lesser known descriptors such as "grapefruit" to less literal but more culturally-relevant translations increased familiarity to within the range expected for healthy populations. This validated the Sniffin' Sticks test for the Portuguese population without requiring the scents themselves to be altered.
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Olofsson, JK; Gottfried, JA (2015). "The muted sense: neurocognitive limitations of olfactory language". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 19 (6): 314–321. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2015.04.007. ISSN 1364-6613. PMC 4457599. PMID 25979848.
- ^ Majid, A; Kruspe, N (2018). "Hunter-gatherer olfaction is special". Current Biology. 28 (3): 409–413.e2. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2017.12.014. hdl:21.11116/0000-0000-2A33-8. ISSN 0960-9822. PMID 29358070. S2CID 7661728.
- ^ a b Majid, A; Burenhult, N (2014). "Odors are expressible in language, as long as you speak the right language". Cognition. 130 (2): 266–270. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.11.004. hdl:11858/00-001M-0000-0014-9D63-D. ISSN 0010-0277. PMID 24355816. S2CID 16257849. Retrieved 25 August 2020.
- ^ a b c Majid, A; Burenhult, N; Stensmyr, M; de Valk, J; Hansson, BS (2018). "Olfactory language and abstraction across cultures". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences. 373 (1752): 20170139. doi:10.1098/rstb.2017.0139. PMC 6015838. PMID 29915007.
- ^ a b de Valk, JM; Wnuk, E; Huisman, JLA; Majid, A (2016). "Odor–color associations differ with verbal descriptors for odors: A comparison of three linguistically diverse groups". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 24 (4): 1171–1179. doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1179-2. ISSN 1069-9384. PMC 5570805. PMID 27783225.
- ^ a b Sweetser, E (2002). From etymology to pragmatics : metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Peking University Press. p. 37. ISBN 978-7-301-05354-6. OCLC 51718018.
- ^ a b O’Meara, C; Majid, A (2020). "Anger stinks in Seri: Olfactory metaphor in a lesser-described language". Cognitive Linguistics. 31 (3): 367–391. doi:10.1515/cog-2017-0100. S2CID 214002902. Retrieved 25 August 2020.
- ^ Ferdenzi, C; Joussain, P; Digard, B; Luneau, L; Djordjevic, J; Bensafi, M (2016). "Individual differences in verbal and non-verbal affective responses to smells: Influence of odor label across cultures". Chemical Senses. 42 (1): 37–46. doi:10.1093/chemse/bjw098. PMID 27655940. S2CID 28441863. Retrieved 18 August 2020.
- ^ Tekeli, H; Altundağ, A; Salihoğlu, M; Cayönü, M; Kendirli, MT (2013). "The applicability of the "Sniffin' Sticks" olfactory test in a Turkish population". Medical Science Monitor. 19: 1221–1226. doi:10.12659/MSM.889838. PMC 3891317. PMID 24382345.
- ^ Hummel, T; Sekinger, B; Wolf, SR; Pauli, E; Kobal, G (1997). "'Sniffin' sticks': olfactory performance assessed by the combined testing of odor identification, odor discrimination and olfactory threshold". Chemical Senses. 22 (1): 39–52. doi:10.1093/chemse/22.1.39. PMID 9056084.
- ^ Neumann, C; Tsioulos, K; Merkonidis, C; Salam, M; Clark, A; Philpott, C (2012). "Validation study of the "Sniffin' Sticks" olfactory test in a British population: a preliminary communication". Clinical Otolaryngology. 37 (1): 32–27. doi:10.1111/j.1749-4486.2012.02431.x. PMID 22433135. S2CID 2982764.
- ^ Ribeiro, JC; Simões, J; Silva, F; Silva, ED; Hummel, C; Hummel, T; Paiva, A (2016). "Cultural adaptation of the Portuguese version of the "Sniffin' Sticks" smell test: reliability, validity, and normative data". PLOS ONE. 11 (2): e0148937. Bibcode:2016PLoSO..1148937R. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148937. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 4749276. PMID 26863023.