↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Is “Huh?” a Universal Word? Conversational Infrastructure and the Convergent Evolution of Linguistic Items

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
174 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
226 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Is “Huh?” a Universal Word? Conversational Infrastructure and the Convergent Evolution of Linguistic Items
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0078273
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Dingemanse, Francisco Torreira, N. J. Enfield

Abstract

A word like Huh?--used as a repair initiator when, for example, one has not clearly heard what someone just said--is found in roughly the same form and function in spoken languages across the globe. We investigate it in naturally occurring conversations in ten languages and present evidence and arguments for two distinct claims: that Huh? is universal, and that it is a word. In support of the first, we show that the similarities in form and function of this interjection across languages are much greater than expected by chance. In support of the second claim we show that it is a lexical, conventionalised form that has to be learnt, unlike grunts or emotional cries. We discuss possible reasons for the cross-linguistic similarity and propose an account in terms of convergent evolution. Huh? is a universal word not because it is innate but because it is shaped by selective pressures in an interactional environment that all languages share: that of other-initiated repair. Our proposal enhances evolutionary models of language change by suggesting that conversational infrastructure can drive the convergent cultural evolution of linguistic items.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2,227 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 226 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 2%
United States 4 2%
France 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 4 2%
Unknown 204 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 46 20%
Researcher 38 17%
Student > Master 38 17%
Student > Bachelor 18 8%
Other 15 7%
Other 46 20%
Unknown 25 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 57 25%
Psychology 28 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 11%
Social Sciences 16 7%
Computer Science 12 5%
Other 60 27%
Unknown 28 12%