Materiality of architecture expressed through onomatopoeic words in text description of buildings

Abstract

Text descriptions of buildings using onomatopoeic words are a form of communication frequently used by Japanese architects to express their design intent. The onomatopoeic word describes a building vividly and sensually as if it has life and expresses connotative architectural meanings imbued through building posture and gestures, as depicted by the architect. This paper investigates the materiality of architecture through a text analysis of onomatopoeic expressions used to describe architectural works in the Japanese architecture magazine Shinkenchiku (新建築), identifies 24 aspects of architectural materiality reflected in the onomatopoeia used by architects, and typifies their views of architecture as a physical object.

Introduction

When a Japanese architect describes a building verbally as having a “mellow [しっとり, shittori] wood surface” or a “clammy [じっとり, jittori] space,” in both cases, tactile expressions are used related to humidity, although the choice of shittori or jittori conveys a subtle difference in the sense of humidity and its associated image and impression: The former gives the impression of soft wooden surfaces with a good amount of moisture and evokes a gentle and comfortable feeling owing to the wood's materiality, whereas the latter in contrast gives a stuffy impression of a damp room (environment) with excessive moisture in the air and evokes an unpleasant feeling.

Similarly, the expression “the building blends in with the village in a shittori manner” visually describes the relationship between the building and the external environment, and the use of onomatopoeic words captures the essence of the building exterior, as it retains a moderate amount of water without repelling it. Such an appearance blends in with the surrounding landscape, making it sound more appealing and impressive and evoking a feeling of calm and peacefulness.

Japanese architects use onomatopoeias to describe the subtle and intricate relationships between different elements, such as slight variations in hue and texture, changes in space resulting from the flow of people and natural phenomena, and the relative status of a building and its surroundings. Onomatopoeia is a unique form of language that reproduces the sound associated with a particular action or object in a sound-symbolic [Note 1] manner by imitating or suggesting the sound described. Unlike general vocabulary, which may describe things abstractly or objectively, onomatopoeias can evoke a more sympathetic perception of space in better tune with our physical senses. They are highly evocative in visual terms and can easily convey complex nuances. Therefore, when architects use onomatopoeic words to describe their work, they can directly express the nature of the intended architectural idea, which is not yet conceptually articulated, of a clear or undifferentiated image, and convey impressions and value judgments evoked by the phenomena of a building. The use of onomatopoeic language allows architects to communicate their design ideas in a tangible and visceral manner.

Onomatopoeia objectively depicts the animated appearance of a building in accordance with its physical properties, as if it had a temperament. This gives the reader a strong sense of the object's inner spatial character through a sensory filter, thereby suggesting the architect's subjective intention, as implied in the designed architectural space. In this study, materiality is defined as the perceivable material elements that constitute an architectural space, such as the building itself, its constituent parts, and material phenomena. This paper discusses aspects of materiality in architecture as depicted by onomatopoeic expressions in texts describing buildings and architectural spaces.

Sections 2–5 will review previous studies, describe the research subject, and introduce the research method. Section 6 examines the architectural materiality disclosed by onomatopoeias, and Section 7 identifies how materiality expressed through the use of onomatopoeias exposes architectural spatiality. Section 8 discusses the aspects of materiality in architecture through onomatopoeic expressions. Finally, Section 9 concludes the paper by highlighting the architect's perception of undifferentiated spatial images in architecture and emphasizing the role of subjective senses in the design process.

Previous Review

The Japanese philosopher Seiichi Washida argues that onomatopoeia is a form of expression that utilizes sound to depict the physical appearance, gestures, and behaviors of objects, emphasizing that the word's connectedness to sensory experiences which requires different ways of comprehending its meaning than understanding as a concept.¹ The form of expression strongly adheres to the sense of words created by sound, effectively distinguishing nuances, engaging visual, auditory, and tactile perceptions, and evoking vivid impressions. While being a subjective form of expression that encompasses emotions, among native speakers of the language, onomatopoeia can stimulate empathy, facilitate communication, and serve as an effective tool for deepening their understanding of what they perceive. From such an understanding of the character of the language, many studies have been conducted on Japanese onomatopoeia in different fields, exemplified by a study of the use of onomatopoeia in diagnosing patients' medical conditions, particularly in differentiating and recognizing symptoms related to pains.²

Several studies have been conducted on the use of onomatopoeias to express space and describe urban and architectural elements in the field of architecture within Japan. Akita et al.³ surveyed the use of onomatopoeic words that describe environmental elements to reveal their effects on different environmental conditions, such as the intensity of light, sound, and wind. Shinozaki et al.⁴ studied onomatopoeia that evokes pleasant and unpleasant emotions in environments. Wakayama et al.⁵ conducted a study of onomatopoeic vocabulary that conveys the atmosphere of spaces. These researches highlight the usefulness of onomatopoeia as an effective means of conveying the characteristics of the environment in the field of architectural environmental engineering. Uno and Burt⁶ discussed how onomatopoeic words can indicate the cognitive conditions of space, such as size and shape. A corpus was selected from specific onomatopoeia dictionaries using the semantic differential (SD) method to compare the images suggested by the onomatopoeic words used by experienced versus inexperienced architects. The findings revealed the capacity of experienced architects to distinguish and recognize multiple images using onomatopoeic words.

This research agrees with prior studies on the ability of onomatopoeias to convey sensory information in verbal descriptions of architecture. However, their research had the limitations of focusing on either environmental elements or general discussions of space without delving into the details of specific architectural spaces regarding the use of onomatopoeia. Previous studies have utilized experimental methodologies, such as psychological experiments or qualitative questionnaire surveys, to capture subjective impressions of the semantic nuances of various onomatopoeic words as perceived by specific groups of individuals.

An alternative approach was proposed by Imaeda and Kitagawa⁷ in the field of architectural design research. By focusing on onomatopoeia used in architectural design descriptions, the research examined its role in indicating buildings, the design process, and context, and was intended to conceptualize onomatopoeia as a form of design thinking based on the analysis of design as described by onomatopoeia. This research employs a similar method of text analysis to examine the architect's intention regarding the building through an analysis of the descriptive content of specialized onomatopoeic words. This research focuses on onomatopoeic expressions used by Japanese architects to depict architectural spaces that they have designed. The linguistic representation of buildings is examined by analyzing the relationship between words that denote tangible architectural components comprising a space, words that convey the condition and movement of these components, and onomatopoeic words that are modified to embody tangible components. The findings provide a nuanced yet holistic understanding of architectural space by incorporating its physical characteristics and subjective experience. This clarifies the modality of architecture described using onomatopoeic words to reflect sensory and emotional aspects of architectural design.

Research Methodology

Subject of research

This research focuses on text descriptions that feature onomatopoeic expressions used to describe the physical elements and phenomena that constitute an actual architectural space. To provide a comprehensive understanding of Japanese architecture depicted through onomatopoeia, this study analyzes articles from the architectural journal Shinkenchiku⁸ from 1950 to 2010. This continuous collection of published commentaries on architectural works provides consistent and sufficient material representing Japanese architectural discourse. The corpus consists of 538 buildings [Note 2] with 659 instances of onomatopoeic descriptions regarding the actions and conditions of physical elements and phenomena that constitute architectural space in the explanatory texts by architects on their works published in the journal.

Data collection and analysis

An onomatopoeic expression is a linguistic representation that describes the physical components and phenomena constituting a space. It is formed by combining an onomatopoeic word with verbs that express actions and states; its meaning is determined by the context in which it is used. Sentences with onomatopoeic expressions were extracted from the journal article text as the subjects of this study [Note 3]. The perceptible elements that constitute architectural space include not only the physical components of a building and its occupants but also material phenomena such as water, light, and time, which are identified as subjects in this research. Therefore, the base meaning of an onomatopoeic word is determined first by the combination of the base meaning and the degree of phonological significance to the subject [Note 4], followed by verbs that express the action or state of the subject in a subject-predicate relationship, defined as the regulating verb (Figure 1).

[IMAGE OMITTED. SEE PDF]

Table 1 Characteristics of phonemes in onomatopoeic words.

Non-vocal onomatopoeic word	Explanation of content of word and phrase	Characteristics by phoneme
Phoneme	Voicedness	Words and phrases with voiced sounds	Large, slow, strong, heavy, deep, width, stiff, thick, blunt, turbid, powerful
Unvoicedness	Words and phrases with unvoiced sounds	Small, fast, weak, light, shallow, faint, flexible, thin, sharp, clear, bright

This method of categorizing onomatopoeic expressions allows us to resolve the differences between Kanji, Hiragana, and Okurigana scripts in the Japanese writing system. The research method used was correspondence analysis [Note 5]. It is performed by comparing the category of base meaning against the subject and the regulating verb, resulting in two diagrams of scatter plots where correlation tendencies among the categories can be seen. By comparing the combination of both tendencies with each extracted instance, it is possible to capture the overall meaning and clarify the aspects of materiality in architecture as conveyed through verbal onomatopoeic expressions in architectural descriptions.

Findings

Categories of extracted items

The base meaning specifies the character of a physical element or phenomenon when combined with the subject, determines an aspect of the architectural space described by onomatopoeic expression, and expresses the movement or state of phenomena using sound symbolism. Base meaning categories are broadly classified according to phonemes as follows: (1) conditionality, which expresses the relationships between objects; (2) motion, which expresses the object's state of motion; (3) quantitative attributes, which express the quantity or size of the object; (4) qualitative attributes, which express the inherent characteristics or qualities of an object or phenomenon; and (5) sharpness, which expresses the sharpness of the stimulus emitted by an object. In addition, by focusing on the phonemic characteristics of an onomatopoeic word composed of voiced or unvoiced sounds, the degree of voicing was determined and the base meaning was classified into 1 of the 47 categories listed in Table 2.

Table 2 Base meaning categories.

Category	Onomatopoeic word	No.
Conditionality	【Elasticity (low)】	Wiggly [くねくね, kunekune]/freely [のびのび, nobinobi]/leisurely [のんびり, nonbiri]/squishy [ふにゃふにゃ, funyafunya]/lazy [まったり, mattari]/relaxed [ゆったり, yuttari]	86
【Coiling (high)】	Round and round [ぐるぐる, guruguru]/around [ぐるっ, guru’]/encircling [ぐるり, gururi]	41
【Scatteredness (high)】	in pieces [ばらばら, barabara]	37
【Fixedness (low)】	Firmly [しっかり, shikkari]	36
【Orderliness (low)】	Neatly [きちん, kichin]/clean [すっきり, sukkiri]	32
【Limit (high)】	just barely [ぎりぎり, girigiri]	29
【Clarity (sharp)】	Distinct [くっきり, kukkiri]/clear [すっかり, sukkari]/identical [そっくり, sokkuri]/poof [ぱっ, pa’]	28
【Adhesiveness (low)】	Snugly [ぴたっ, pita’]/fittingly [ぴたり, pitari]/perfectly [ぴったり, pittari]	18
【Obscurity (high)】	Blindly [ぼっ, bo’]/blankly [ぼやっ, boya’]/dimly [ぼんやり, bonyari]	14
【Deposition (low)】	Nicely [しっくり, shikkuri]/entirely [とっぷり, toppuri]	13
【Excessiveness (low)】	Plenty [たっぷり, tappuri]	11
【Denseness (high)】	Tight [ぎっしり, gisshiri]/packed [ぎっちり, gicchiri]/snug [ぎゅっ, gyu’]/stuffed [びっしり, bisshiri]	11
【Bending (strong)】	Zigzag [じぐざく, jiguzagu]	9
【Cracking (weak)】	Plopped [ぽかっ, poka’]/gaping [ぽっかり, pokkari]	9
【Fixedness (high)】	Sturdily [がっしり, gasshiri]/solidly [がっちり, gacchiri]/securely [じっ, ji’]	7
【Expandability (low)】	Thickly [こんもり, konmori]/plopped out [ぷくっ, puku’]	6
【Tenseness (low)】	Stretched [ぴしっ, pishi’]/tautly [ぴん, pin]	4
【Limit (low)】	Grazing [すれすれ, suresure]	4
【Coiling (low)】	Twirl [くるっ, kuru’]/spin [くるり, kururi]	3
【Rolling (weak)】	Flutteringly [ひらひら, hirahira]/Gently [ひらり, hirari]	3
【Unevenness (high)】	Craggy [がたがた, gatagata]/bumpy [でこぼこ, dekoboko]	2
【Scatteredness (low)】	Totally [めちゃくちゃ, mechakucha]	2
【Moistness (low)】	Mellow [しっとり, shittori]	2
【Elasticity (high)】	Bounciness [ぐにょり, gunyori]/wobbling [ぶよぶよ, buyobuyo]	2
【Stickiness (strong)】	Sloppy [どろどろ, dorodoro]/sticky [べったり, bettari]	2
【Denseness (low)】	Thick [みっちり, micchiri]	1
Motion	【Amount of change (low)】	Sluggishly [のったり, nottari]/slow [ゆっくり, yukkuri]	43
【Resistance (low)】	Crisp [さくさく, sakusaku]/airy [すかっ, suka’]/cleanly [すっぽり, suppori]/slick [すぽっ, supo’]/slippery [するする, surusuru]/silently [すんなり, sunnari]	39
【Collision (low)】	Softly [しん, shin]/silently [しんしん, shinshin]/quietly [そっ, so’]/small [ちょこん, chokon]/tiny [ちょん, chon]/discreetly [ひっそり, hissori]/bang [ぽん, pon]/tapping [ぽんぽん, ponpon]	38
【Acceleration (high)】	Rapidly [ぐんぐん, gungun]/gradually [だんだん, dandan]/quickly [どんどん, dondon]	13
【Collision (high)】	Zooming [ぐっ, gu’]/whizzing [びゅんびゅん, byunbyun]	9
【Amplitude (small)】	Waving [ふらふら, furafura]/wavering [ふらり, furari]/wobble [ゆらゆら, yurayura]	6
【Acceleration (low)】	Shooting [さぁーっ, saa’]	2
【Permeability (high)】	Gradually [じんわり, jinwari]	1
【Resistance (high)】	Slippery [ずるずる, zuruzuru]	1
Quantitative Attributes	【Amount (few)】	In bits and pieces [ちまちま, chimachima]/a glimpse [ちらちら, chirachira]/peek [ちらっ, chira’]/peeking [ちらり, chirari]/glancingly [ひょっこり, hyokkori]/a little bit [ほんのり, honnori]	17
【Amount (many)】	Bam [どっ, do’]/crumpled [どっかり, dokkari]/lumpy [どっさり, dossari]/bubbling [ぼこぼこ, bokoboko]	10
【Thickness (thin)】	Sticking out [にょっきり, nyokkiri]	1
Qualitative Attributes	【Mass (light)】	lightly [ふっ, fu’]/poof [ふわーっ, fuwaa’]/fluffy [ふわっ, fuwa’]/fluffiness [ふわり, fuwari]/fuzzy [ふんわり, funwari]	18
【Mass (heavy)】	Lounging [ごろごろ, gorogoro]/laziness [ごろり, gorori]/heaviness [どっしり, dosshiri]	8
【Roughness (rough)】	Coarsely [ざっくり, zakkuri]/roughly [ざらざら, zarazara]	3
【Flexibility (low)】	Plumpness [むっくり, mukkuri]/softness [やんわり, yanwari]	2
【Hardness (high)】	Stiff [がちがち, gachigachi]	1
【Hardness (small)】	Clanging [かちんかちん, kachinkachin]	1
Sharpness	【Brightness (sharp)】	Clanking [かんかん, kankan]/sparkling [きらきら, kirakira]/sparkle [きらり, kirari]/twinkle [きらりきらり, kirarikirari]/glittering [ちかちか, chikachika]/shining [ぴかぴか, pikapika]	27
【Brightness (bright)】	Bright [さんさん, sansan]/elegant [はんなり, hannari]	5
【Brightness (strong)】	Dazzlingly [ぎらぎら, giragira]	2
Total	659

The subject is an aspect of the architectural space that the architect couples with an onomatopoeic word. Determined by their semantic content, the extracted words and phrases were classified into 43 categories based on their scale or role in the architectural space (Table 3).

Table 3 Subject categories.

Category	Category explanation	Use example	No.
{Overall architecture}	The whole building	Building/art museum	93
{People}	All people, including children and adults	Child/guest	48
{Room space}	Separated unit spaces in the building	Greenhouse/bedroom	42
{Wall}	Vertical structures separating spaces	Wall/outer wall/wall Surface	40
{Roof}	Anything that faces the outside and covers the upper part of the space	Roof/flat roof	32
{Furnishings}	Tools such as everyday fixtures and furniture	Counter/book	31
{Light}	Rays of light emitted from luminous objects such as the sun or lighting	Light/sun/lighting	26
{Volume}	Buildings as masses and their sizes	Volume	25
{Circulation space}	Spaces intended for movement, such as corridors and passageways	Corridor/stairway	23
{External architectural appearance}	The view of a building from the outside	Façade/external appearance	21
{Territory}	The extent to which uses and things are related	Place/around window	19
{Opening}	A section of a building cut out for light or ventilation	Opening/window	17
{External space}	The exterior of a building, regardless of its function	Courtyard/plaza	17
{Structure}	The framework of the building	Structure/wood construction	17
{Surrounding environment}	Natural features and buildings around the site	Surrounding environs/neighboring houses	16
{Material}	A generic term for materials that make up a building	Materials/raw materials	15
{Detail}	The part of a building to which multiple members are joined.	Fittings/details	14
{Internal space}	The interior of a building, regardless of function.	Interior spaces	14
{Water}	A compound of hydrogen and oxygen in any state	Water/droplet	14
{Landscape}	The visible appearance of a place at a certain point, such as a view	Scene/scenery	12
{Vegetation}	Something that lives in a fixed place, such as a tree or grass	Zelkova/pine	10
{Plane figure}	A plan form that is the result of a floor plan	Plane figure/plan	10
{Metal}	Metal as a building material	Corten steel	9
{Lumber}	Wood processed as a building material	Lumber/yakisugi	9
{Color}	Items related to color, such as saturation and hue	Color/blue	9
{Ceiling}	Surfaces that constitute the upper limit of interior space	Ceiling	9
{Outline}	The external form of an object as perceived by the sense of sight	Outline/silhouette	9
{Air}	Colorless and transparent mixed gases and their flow within a space	Air/wind	8
{Terrain}	Morphological features of the ground	Flat ground/slope	7
{Floor}	Surfaces constituting the lower limit of interior space	Floor/slab	6
{Column}	Vertical members supporting a building	Columns/pillars	5
{Stone}	A mass of minerals	Small piece of marble/stone	4
{Time}	A certain length in time	Hours/time	4
{Eaves}	The lower edge of a roof that overhangs the exterior wall of a building	Eaves	4
{Shadow}	A dark area that is not illuminated by light	Shadow	3
{Glass}	Glass as a building component	Glass/glass box	3
{Site}	A certain parcel of land occupied by a building	Site/lot	2
{Nature}	Untouched by man, such as a mountain	Mountain/valley	2
{Measurement}	Location of the part defined by the architect	Window height/ceiling height	2
{Weatherproof material}	Material that shuts out the external environment and maintains the internal environment	Waterproofing/insulation	2
{Heat}	Energy produced by the motion of particles of an object	Heat/solar heat	2
{Beam}	A horizontal component that supports the building	Beam	2
{Fence}	Enclosure at the boundary of a building or site	Wood fence/earthen wall	2
Total	659

The regulating verb complements the meaning derived from the sound symbolism exhibited by an onomatopoeic word. It determines the semantic attributes of an onomatopoeic word and specifies the action or state of the subject within an architectural space. The words were classified into 59 categories (Table 4).

4

Table

Regulating verb categories.

Correspondence analysis of the base meaning against the architectural subject

Using a corpus of 659 instances of text description, a correspondence analysis was conducted to present the relationship between the base meaning and the subject. The results are presented in a scatter plot diagram, where the distance between points represents the strength of the correlations among words used to read the tendencies (Figure 2). The scatter plots were zoned and interpreted by assigning weights in proportion to the distance from the origin and organized into four trends: (1) 169 cases of Environmental Planning by Potential, (2) 77 cases of Space-Creating Fluids, (3) 64 cases of Texture Captured by Zooming In and Out, and (4) 94 cases of Shape-Mediated Behavior of Major Material Constituents of Architecture. The following describes the combinations that constitute these trends and the characteristics of each trend:

[IMAGE OMITTED. SEE PDF]

For (1) Environmental Planning by Potential, the subject [Vegetation] exhibited a strong correlation with the base meaning [Expandability (low)], expressing the appearance of natural objects that have not been touched by human hands, as in the description of “the zelkova and maple trees in the thickly [こんもり, konmori] growing garden.” [Note 6] The subject [People] shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Coiling (high)] and expresses the unrestrained and free movement of children, as in the description of “children running round and round [ぐるぐる, guruguru].” [Note 7] These onomatopoeic expressions reveal the latent characteristics of natural objects and people that make up the environment, expressing the comfortable and lively aspect of the space.

For (2) Space-Creating Fluids, the subject [Light] shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Brightness (bright)], capturing a scene of vivid rays of light, as in the description “Light pours down brightly [さんさん, sansan] from all directions,” [Note 8] which expresses a state of light with a large amount of illumination. The subject [Heat] shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Amount of change (few)] and captures an irregularly shaped fluid, as in the depiction of “heat is slowly [ゆっくり, yukkuri] discharged through a slit in the outer wall,” [Note 9] and expresses the rate at which heat flow is adjusted considering its effect on the sense of touch. One could argue that these onomatopoeic expressions express the minute movement of space adjusted as slow or rapid movements of the fluid present and experienced in the space.

For (3) Textures Captured by Zooming In and Out, the subject [Volume] shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Limit (high)], expressing that the planned building is positioned as part of a high-density urban context, as in the depiction of “the surrounding buildings are built just barely [ぎりぎり, girigiri] along the adjacent property boundary.” [Note 10] The subject [Detail] shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Roughness (rough)] and expresses the roughness of the material surface that becomes apparent when focusing on the surface of the building, as in the description that “(as for the tiling and stonework), they are finished coarsely [ざっくり, zakkuri] so that the warmth of handmade craftsmanship can be conveyed.” [Note 11] One could argue that these onomatopoeic expressions convey the presence of architecture by capturing the state of things through cognition at different scales, ranging from macroscopic to microscopic perspectives.

For (4) Shape-Mediated Behavior of Major Material Constituents of Architecture, the subject [Column] shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Thickness (thin)] and expresses the appearance of columns that are thin, long, and neatly upright, as in the description of the “cantilevered concrete columns rising sticking out [にょっきり, nyokkiri] from the ground.” [Note 12] In addition, the subject [External architectural appearance] shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Hardness (high)], such as the description of “the skin of the building, which has been stiffly [がちがち, gachigachi] exfoliated by the security requirements,” [Note 13] which conveys an introverted and rigid character of the walls. The shapes and textures of the building's primary components contribute to its dynamic quality, imbuing the lifeless structure with expressiveness and character.

Correspondence analysis of base meanings and regulating verbs

A second correspondence analysis was conducted using the same corpus of 659 text description instances to present the relationship between the base meaning and the regulating verb. The results are presented in a scatter plot diagram, where the distance represents the strengths of the correlations among the words used to read the trends (Figure 3). The scatter plots were zoned and interpreted by assigning weights in proportion to the distance from the origin and organized into four trends: (1) 112 cases of Fine-Tuned Movements and Orientations, (2) 78 cases of Deviations from the Steady-State, (3) 183 cases of Differences in Arrangements, and (4) 94 cases of Correlations Revealed through Sharpness. The following describes the combinations that comprise these trends and their characteristics.

[IMAGE OMITTED. SEE PDF]

For (1) Fine-Tuned Movements and Orientations, the regulating verb <Rotation> shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Coiling (high)] and expresses a powerful appearance through large multiple windings, as in the description of “winding a 300m long wall round and round [ぐるぐる, guruguru].” [Note 14] The regulating verb <Rotation> also shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Coiling (low)], as in the description of “a windmill spinning in a circle [くるくる, kurukuru] when there is wind,” [Note 15] where lightness is added from the movement of small rotations that expresses the atmosphere of the subject. One could argue that these onomatopoeic expressions suggest the presence of the subject by recognizing subtle differences in the degree of directional movement, thereby imparting emotion to the subject.

For (2) Deviations from the Steady-State, the regulating verb <Protrusion> shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Expandability (low)] and expresses how the subject adapts as much as possible to become part of the environment while maintaining its functionality, as in the description of “a stairwell that has been plopped out [ぷくっ, puku’] of shape so that the adjacent dwelling becomes a familiar everyday landscape.” [Note 16] In addition, the regulating verb <Deformation> shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Elasticity (low)] and expresses a situation in which the relationship between the subject and the surrounding environment is unbalanced. Furthermore, the subject exists passively, as in the depiction of “architecture that changes shape in a squishy [ふにゃふにゃ, funyafunya] way depending on the temperature.” [Note 17] These onomatopoeic expressions convey the aspect of architecture that undergoes heteronomous changes, creating a situation where the relationship between events is unstable and unbalanced.

For (3) Differences in the Arrangements, the regulating verb <Proximity> shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Limit (high)] and expresses the coexistence of balanced events, as in the description of “a boundary surface is established with just barely [ぎりぎり, girigiri] the right amount of balance.” [Note 18] The regulating verb <Presence> also shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Collision (low)] and expresses a state of unity with the subject by suppressing the presence of the subject, as in the description of “architecture standing discreetly [ひっそり, hissori] (amid nature).” [Note 19] These onomatopoeic expressions convey the subtle relationship between the various components that make up architecture, highlighting the nuanced interactions that take place at the boundaries between these components.

For (4) Correlations Revealed through Sharpness, the regulating verb <Transmission> shows a strong correlation with base meaning [Brightness (sharp)], expressing the presence of a strongly bright subject protruding from the surroundings, as in the text description “Only the glass roof seems to shine in a sparkling [きらきら, kirakira] manner through the trees.” [Note 20] Moreover, the regulating verb <Entry> shows a strong correlation with the base meaning [Obscurity (high)] and expresses an ambiguous fusion between the foreground, which is the subject, and the background, by incorporating one into the other, as in the description of “the blue sky, green trees, and black stone walls are reflected dimly [ぼんやり, bonyari] on the translucent screen, depending on time and weather.” [Note 21] In these onomatopoeic expressions, the subject behaves in a manner that is either sharply focused or inexplicably vague, forming a hierarchy between the subject and the phenomena surrounding it and highlighting the correlation between the two events.

Materiality of architecture in terms of onomatopoeia base meanings, subjects, and regulating verbs

In this paper, the base meaning of sound-symbolic onomatopoeic words, the architectural subject that makes up space, and the regulating verb that modifies the subject are the three elements that determine the materiality of architecture in onomatopoeic expressions. By superimposing the tendencies obtained from the correspondence analysis, typologies based on the meanings of words were derived and used to examine architectural materiality in onomatopoeic expressions. The findings result from a comparison of all the examples of the combination of base meanings with subjects and regulating verbs in context, judged according to the differences in tendencies and their strengths in Figures 2 and 3, with consideration of the original text description. The results are presented as a series of semantic clusters described as follows:

The differences in tendencies shown in Figures 2 and 3 are then positioned along two axes to construct a framework and summarized across multiple axes to derive a cohesive meaning [Note 22]. This framework has a strong tendency toward affordance through a single element and a weak tendency to afford meaning through other elements. Although the axes of the different tendencies obtained in Figures 2 and 3 are independent evaluation axes, they cannot be clearly distinguished, except for the combination of peripheral elements in Figures 2 and 3, which are largely responsible for the composition of each tendency. Therefore, the dotted lines indicate the general area along the axes by the difference in each tendency, and the arrows indicate each tendency of the vertical and horizontal axes, together with the strength or weakness of each tendency. Based on the above considerations, 24 typologies (A-X) were derived as architectural materiality in the onomatopoeic expressions [Note 23] (Figure 4). The following discusses each type.

• As illustrated through descriptions such as “By actually experiencing the wall round and round [ぐるぐる, guruguru] toward the sky …” [Note 24] or “One notices that this is a garden-like building that gradually [だんだん, dandan] rises from the ground into the air,” [Note 25] A embodies the directionality and vigorous mobility of a building, symbolizing its release from inescapable gravity. It captures the sense of liberation from the physicality of the building.
• As illustrated through a description such as “The space extends from the large wall of the main building to the sloping surface of the mountain that encircles [ぐるり, gururi] it …,” [Note 26] B, by articulating the expanse of an enveloping area, clarifies the immersion and encompassing relationship, and establishes a hierarchy among the elements that compose the space.
• As illustrated through descriptions such as “The heat that accumulates in this space is slowly [ゆっくり, yukkuri] discharged through slits in the outer wall” (see Note 9)) or “Every day at noon, light slowly [ゆっくり, yukkuri] changes from blue to red like a prism to tell you the time,” [Note 27] C, by its minute behavior and transformation, evokes a sense of the changing phenomena that exist all around us through the built environment.
• As illustrated through a description such as “Warm, not too high ceilings that cleanly [すっぽり, suppori] envelop the patient …,” [Note 28] D suggests a seamless envelopment of the entire space, creating a sensation of minimal resistance [Note 29]. Consequently, the architectural elements and materials used in the building design do not impose any discomfort as they enclose the area, providing individuals with a feeling of reassurance.
• As illustrated through descriptions such as “… The 6 cm square solid cedar wood from Yoshino is stuffed [びっしり, bisshiri] in rows as though to create neat yet warm welcoming eaves” [Note 30] or “I also feel that a house made up of small-scale spaces, clustered together in bits and pieces [ちまちま, chimachima], would be easier to live in,” [Note 31] E represents a concentrated gathering of architectural components. The diminutive scale of these elements allows us to perceive the presence of architecture from its physical properties to its spatial units, while recognizing the distinctive characteristics of each individual element.
• As illustrated through descriptions such as “A continuous zigzagging [じぐざく, jiguzagu] wall, like a Japanese folding screen, is constructed to correspond to the pedestrian scale” [Note 32] or “The interior wall … forms a zigzag [じぐざく, jiguzagu] shape …,” [Note 33] F represents walls finely divided by a series of sharply articulated corners, creating a sense of movement in space.
• As illustrated through descriptions such as “… The skin of the building, which has become stiffly [がちがち, gachigachi] exfoliated by the security requirements …” (see Note 13) or “… The clanging [かちんかちん, kachinkachin] wall surface is often difficult to put a skin on it …,” [Note 34] G portrays a building's surface layer transformed into a hardened state, creating an impression of inaccessibility to others.
• As illustrated through a description such as “The living and dining rooms are … positioned so that you can slowly [ゆっくり, yukkuri] enjoy time with family,” [Note 35] H embodies the stability of a building with minimal fluctuations in the condition, resulting in a tranquil space that encourages peaceful engagement in various activities.
• As illustrated through a description such as “Stucco is also plenty [たっぷり, tappuri] used for exterior joints,” [Note 36] I signifies that the building elements are intentionally designed with slightly larger proportions than strictly necessary, which gives some leeway in volume and scale, resulting in a space that offers enhanced functionality.
• As illustrated through a description such as “The three nursery rooms, with their thickly [こんもり, konmori] raised roofs,” [Note 37] J expresses the nuanced appearance of the building with the bulging and raised shapes that hint at the interior. The exterior design conveys the inherent activities and phenomena taking place within the building, creating a visual representation that implies the inner workings of the building.
• As illustrated through a description such as “architecture that changes its shape in a squishy [ふにゃふにゃ, funyafunya] way depending on the temperature … was found desirable,” (see Note 17)) K embodies the building or its components being relaxed and softened, thus forming a favorable state where the structure is relatively receptive to the surrounding elements or conditions it interacts with, creating a dynamic and adaptable environment.
• As illustrated through a description such as “… The wind travels across the water surface and flows slowly [ゆっくり, yukkuri] out of the room,” [Note 38] L signifies a subtle and light flow of environmental elements that are integral to the building, resulting in subtle changes to the indoor climate that ultimately create a comfortable environment.
• As illustrated through a description such as “By arranging according to a clean [すっきり, sukkiri] detail …,” [Note 39] M indicates the formation of a well-formed state, where the simplified details convey the sense of aesthetic of the building.
• As illustrated through descriptions such as “… The seats are close to the field and the slope is just barely [ぎりぎり, girigiri] at the limit …” [Note 40] or “The building's eastern line …, the north line is a proposal of this kind … driven just barely [ぎりぎり, girigiri] to the limit,” [Note 41] N indicates a building approaching its limit, and the boundary is visually outlined by elements coming as close as possible to the boundary [Note 42].
• As illustrated through descriptions such as “The exterior of the building is finished with a rough [ざらざら, zarazara], stain-resistant ceramic sprayed material …” [Note 43] or “As for the tiling and stonework, … they are finished coarsely [ざっくり, zakkuri] so that the warmth of handmade craftsmanship can be conveyed,” (see Note 11)) O indicates a surface treatment that is tactilely impressive by finishing in a rough state rather than by arranging the details in a visually pleasing manner.
• As illustrated through a description such as “There are times when you come across a building where there is no physical change in the space, but the occupants and the building blend so nicely [しっくり, shikkuri] together that it has a different intensity than when it was first built,” [Note 44] P indicates that a building seamlessly integrated with its environment, resulting in a serene ambiance and a harmonious scene.
• As illustrated through descriptions such as “… three times the amount of wood was used to build a sturdy [がっしり, gasshiri] frame …” [Note 45] or “… Rainproofing and insulation treatment must be precise [きっちり, kicchiri],” [Note 46] Q indicates that the building is in a state of solid order, and its function is maximized by ensuring that the details have no deficiency.
• As illustrated through a description such as “Its beams, walls, and openings are each composed in such a way that they interfere with each other while standing alone in pieces [ばらばら, barabara],” [Note 47] R signifies the dispersed and independent nature of individual building components, whose juxtaposition reveals a system of interconnected and interdependent parts that collectively form the architecture as a whole while maintaining their individuality.
• As illustrated through a description such as “… It will be firmly [しっかり, shikkari] rooted as an office building for the international trade fair [in the context]),” [Note 48] S asserts the building's strong connection, stability, and rootedness within the local community.
• As illustrated through a description such as “We do not wish to be at odds with nature … We want it to be a building that stands discreetly [ひっそり, hissori],” (see Note 19)) T signifies a building's intention to minimize its influence on the surroundings, assimilate with them, and thus dilute its presence while avoiding self-assertion.
• As illustrated through descriptions such as “The bubbling [ぼこぼこ, bokoboko], continually rising water glows white in the underwater lighting when it gets dark at night …” [Note 49] or “With its deep red sun shining dazzlingly [ぎらぎら, giragira] like a Van Gogh painting, the 36°C weather outdoors in Kumamoto also …,” [Note 50] U indicates the space being defined by natural elements that exhibit a strong sense of existence.
• As illustrated through a description such as “This piece glistens and sparkles [きらきら, kirakira] like clouds in a cloudy sky catching the light,” [Note 51] V expresses bright shining, and the building asserts its presence by harnessing natural phenomena.
• As illustrated through a description such as “The solar collectors are also unitized rather than stickily [べったり, bettari] affixing all over the roof, and the east, west, and north sides are high-sidelighted …,” [Note 52] U indicates the avoidance of excessive adhesion and the adjustment of discomfort between the different architectural elements of the complex by varying the degree of adhesion, thereby creating a contrast between the integration of details and the overall composition.
• As illustrated through a description such as “…, the blue sky, green trees, and black stone walls are reflected dimly [ぼんやり, bonyari],” (see Note 21)) X indicates a scene abstracted through the presence of elements around the building, where visual information is not easily recognizable and the spatial scene is primarily formed by coloration.

[IMAGE OMITTED. SEE PDF]

Discussion and Concluding Remarks

This paper discusses the materiality of architecture expressed by Japanese architects using onomatopoeic words when describing their buildings in a combination of sound-symbolic onomatopoeia base meanings, (architectural) subjects, and regulating verbs.

The study first examined the relationship between the categories of base meaning and subjects as a whole and identified four trends: Environmental Planning by Potential, Space-Creating Fluids, Texture Captured by Zooming In and Out, and Shape-Mediated Behavior of Major Material Constituents of Architecture. Similarly, base meaning and regulating verbs can be classified into four trends: Fine-Tuned Movements and Orientations, Deviations from the Steady-State, Differences in Arrangements, and Correlations Revealed through Sharpness. Based on the above, by superimposing the characteristics of sound-symbolic base meanings, subjects, and regulating verbs, 24 distinct typologies of the materiality of architecture on onomatopoeic expressions were found. They are first described by their meanings, subjects, and regulating verbs and can be further divided into four characteristics based on their properties and roles.

A, C, H, L, and U are typologies that indicate the passage of time, movement of place, or transformation of space due to the existential movement of environmental components, such as light and air, using onomatopoeic words that indicate movement in relation to a building that is supposed to remain motionless. These represent the phenomenal aspects of architecture that move between existence and disappearance. E, I, Q, R, and W capture the sense of the presence of densely packed objects, the added value of space through the use of extra materials, the functionality of tightly bound members, and the sense of foreign objects being attached. They express the aspect of space with a complex nature by emphasizing the quality of local elements that compose the whole, such as quantity, density, and cohesion. D, F, G, J, K, M, and O allude to the effects of architecture on people, such as the architectural surface details that evoke physical sensations, the emphasis on architectural space and its sense of place by evoking the use of space that shows human movement and daily life, the feeling of relief induced by the generous space, the aesthetics of the building's ornamentation and proportions, and the aversion caused by the visual impression given by the exterior appearance. They express objects that compose architecture, their properties, and their spatial aspects as something that promotes human perception, experience, and psychological effects. B, N, P, S, T, V, and X represent relationships such as the directivity to the external landscape through the building's behavior, the inclusion/exclusion relationship through the specification of location and direction, the foreground/background relationship through sharpness and bluntness, and the congruence through form and material conditions. These are antagonism, juxtaposition, unity, and fusion, which relate delicately to the physical relationships between the building and the surrounding environment.

In describing buildings using onomatopoeic words, Japanese architects make apparent the localized aspects and the aspects of things and phenomena that compose an architectural space based on their sensibility, thereby relativizing the relationships among the elements that compose an architectural space and creating a complex and comprehensive view of it. In addition, it implies the physical or psychological behavior of people in architectural space and introduces a direct and experiential perspective to form a relationship between the architectural object and people through perceptions. Furthermore, by inflecting the aspects of the building with relaxation, tension, rhythm, and stillness, the architect finds a relative relationship between the building and surrounding events. It can be said that the architect has grasped a continuous totality of architectural components from the elements of the building to the whole and its surrounding events. Stated differently, the value of architecture is formed through seamless thinking that relies on the strength of the relationship between immediate objects, as perceived by the senses, as opposed to the segmented thinking of architecture based on words that indicate general concepts.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Mayu Fujinaga and Masao Nogami for their assistance in preparing the original Japanese documents and paper.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest related to this research. Hiroyuki Shinohara has received funding for this publication from the Chinese University of Hong Kong, but this funding was not directly related to the research presented in this paper. The authors certify that no financial interests have influenced the objectivity or integrity of this work.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

Washida S. 鷲田清一“Guzuguzu” no Riyū 「ぐずぐず」の理由 [The Reason for ‘Lingering’]. Kadokawa Gakugei Shuppan; 2011.

Sakamoto M 坂本 真樹, Ono M 小野 正理, Shimizu Y 清水 祐一郎. “Itami o Hyōsu onomatope o Mochiita Monshin Shien Shisutemu” 痛みを表すオノマトペを用いた問診支援システム [A system supporting medical interviews using onomatopoeia expressing pains]. Jinkō Chino Gakkai Zenkoku Kaigi Ronbunshū 人工知能学会全国大会論文集 26 (2012): 1–3.

Akita G 秋田剛, Kogo T 古賀誉章, Sano N 佐野奈緒子, Tsujimura S 辻村壮平, Ishiguro K 石黒恭平. “Gitaigo giongo o mochiita kankyō hyōgen ni kansuru kiso‐teki kenkyū” 擬態語・擬音語を用いた環境表現に関する基礎的研究 [A basic research on expression of environment by means of onomatopoeia]. Nihon Kenchiku Gakkai Taikai Gakujutsu Kōen Kōgai Shū (Kankyō Kōgaku I) 日本建築学会大会学術講演梗概集 (環境工学I) 2011 (2011): 183–184.

Shinozaki T 篠崎智弘, Sano N 佐野奈緒子, Koga T 古賀誉章, Akita T 秋田剛, Tujimura S 辻村壮平. “Onomatope hyōgen ga sōki saseru kai‐fukai jōdō ni kansuru kenkyū” オノマトペ表現が想起させる快・不快情動に関する研究 [Research on the degree of comfort which onomatopoeic expression reminds]. Nihon Kenchiku Gakkai Taikai Gakujutsu Kōen Kōgai Shū (Kankyō Kōgaku I) 日本建築学会大会学術講演梗概集 (環境工学I) 2012 (2012): 75–76.

Wakayama M 若山麻衣, Ishibashi Y 石橋優貴, Mabuchi D 馬淵大宇, Kobayashi K 小林恵吾, Watanabe H 渡辺仁史. “Kenchiku kūkan no yōso kara mita onomatope ni yoru hyōgen” 建築空間の要素からみたオノマトペによる表現 [Expression of architecture by onomatopoeia based on tha spaces element]. Nihon Kenchiku Gakkai Taikai Gakujutsu Kōen Kōgai Shū (Kenchiku Keikaku) 日本建築学会大会学術講演梗概集 (建築計画) 2015 (2015): 613–614.

Uno M 宇野真明, Dewancker B. “Kūkan o hyōgensuru gitaigo ni kansuru kenkyū ‐ Sekkei keiken‐sha to hi‐keiken‐sha no hikaku” 空間を表現する擬態語に関する研究 – 設計経験者と非経験者の比較 – [Study on the use of space expressing mimetic words – a comparison between design and non‐design students]. Nihon Kenchiku Gakkai Kyūshū Shibu Kenkyū Hōkokushū 日本建築学会九州支部研究報告集 50 (2011): 133–136.

Imaeda R 今枝良輔, Kitagawa K 北川啓介. “Kenchikubutsu no gengo byōsha ni okeru onomatope kara miru shutai tokusei” 建築物の言語描写におけるオノマトペからみる主体特性 [Characteristics of subjects from the point of onomatopoeia in the text description of buildings]. Nihon Kenchiku Gakkai Tokai Shibu Kenkyū Hōkokushū 日本建築学会東海支部研究報告集 50 (2012): 585–588.

Shinkenchiku‐sha. 新建築Shinkenchiku, 1950.1–2010.12.

Hamano SS. The Sound‐Symbolic System of Japanese. Thesis (Ph.D.) University of Florida; 1986.

Yoshii H. 吉井 宏“Kūkan Ninshiki no Hōhō to Hattatsu ni Tsuite – Sono (2): Onomatope no Hassei to Kōzō” 空間認識の方法と発達について‐その(2): オノマトペの発生と構造 [Methods and development of spatial perception – part 2: Onomatopoeia generation and structure]. Bijutsu Kyōiku Gaku: Bijutsu‐ka Kyōiku Gakkai‐shi 美術教育学:美術科教育学会誌. 1983;5:89‐99.

Tajima Y 田島毓堂, Niwa K 丹羽一弥 (eds.). Nihongo Ronkyū 3: Gendai Nihongo no Kenkyū 日本語論究3 現代日本語の研究 [Japanese Language Studies <3> Research on Modern Japanese]. Izumi Shoin, 1992.

Shibata T. 柴田武Nihongo wa omoshiroi日本語はおもしろい [Japanese Is Interesting]. Iwanami Shoten; 1995.

Agita T 阿力田稔子, Hoshino K 星野和子. Giongo Gitaigo Tsukaikata Jiten ‐ Tadashii Imi to Yōhō ga Sugu Wakaru 擬音語・擬態語使い方辞典―正しい意味と用法がすぐわかる [Onomatopoeia expression usage dictionary: Readily understand the correct meanings and usage]. Sōtakusha, 1995.

Ono M. 小野正弘Giongo Gitaigo 4500: Nihongo Onomatope Jiten 擬音語・擬態語 4500 日本語オノマトペ辞典 [4500 Onomatopoeia: Japanese onomatopoeia dictionary]. Shogakukan. 2007.