Hi MLT! Sorry for the late response. :) I think you've answered your own questions fine, but the confusion here is which direction we're both coming from. Are we looking at the parents' perspective or the babies'? Your response to my quote just above makes sense, but you changed the perspective a full 180 degrees to achieve that. It still doesn't answer why "mama" is fundamentally associated with the mother and "papa" associated with the father. I'm just seeing an arbitrary connection. I mean, regarding the original development of the words, not the baby talk analogue of a language. It is probably my mistake that I refuse to take this question at face value. Victor's other questions all relate to ancient connections between languages, and I suspect this question is no exception, being a pointer to an argument for a proto-language. Not just about English. What tipped me off is the "ma-" sound being almost universal when referring to mothers, in any language. But onomatopoeic origins? Conjecture at best. :-/ But I think we agree that onomatopoeia is not the only key to language. I do enjoy reading the discussion, but since this is someone else's question, I'd love to see your questions put up separately. We'll have more input! :D Cheers, and I do love your work ^^ PS. I think your first two questions are a tad rhetorical. ;-) But I'll bite at #1 with this cheeky response: the Chinese word for "cat" is actually 猫 -"māo"! No idea what happened in Europe. No accounting for taste, I suppose? And yes that was a cheat answer from me. Heh.

I ran out of room. :) Yes, I think I may be enjoying this discussion a little too much. Peachey, I am curious to know what you think about the following: 1. Does onomatopoeia HAVE to be a name for something?.... like a TYPE of rifle, drum, etc.? (I do not call a bee a "buzz", nor do I call a cat a "meow," nor do I call a clock a "tick tock." So, I am curious to know what you think.) 2. Wouldn't onomatopoeia be a word that originated from the sound made by something? 3. What is your perspective on the origin of the words "mama" and "papa"? Peachey, you said, "If they were onomatopoeic, there would be something inherent about mothers and fathers that would inspire those words." But, isn't there something inherent about babies that inspires the words "mama" and "papa"? In some people's minds, the words "mama" and "papa" originated from a baby's "sound-making" due to its limited ability to form words.

Peachey: I see what you are saying. I had said no at first, but then thought about it a little more. I was trying to look at both sides (which I think is good practice when answering questions) The only consideration is that, like we do with animals (meow, etc.), I have also heard people mimicking babies with "ma ma" and "da da" and "pa pa" as the inherent "sounds" a baby would make. Although this would probably never happen, if someone were to ask me what sound a baby makes (just as what sound a clock makes, what sound a dog makes, what sound a drum makes, etc.), probably one of the first "sounds" I would think of is "ma ma" or "da da," or even "waaah!" (for a crying baby) It is not NORMALLY used in an onomatopoeic context (and, in an effort to not deceive Victor, I already clarified this in my previous answer), but I would not say a definite "no." If we can mimic animal sounds, why can we not mimic "baby" sounds? Wouldn't both technically be onomatopoeia? So, I suppose the questions now are both: 1. *IS* "ma ma" and "pa pa" onomatopoeia? 2. *CAN* "ma ma" and "pa pa" be onomatopoeia? My answer: 1. No, not usually. Most times "mama" and "papa" are names a child would call a parent. This would DEFINITELY not be onomatopoeia. 2. Yes, given the context of someone mimicking the sound a baby makes. In my mind, if you can call it a "sound," then it technically qualifies as onomatopoeia. (I suppose this depends on the perspective, though. Probably most people would think of a habitual crying sound first before anything else.) Source: myself (American English)

No. If they were onomatopoeic, there would be something inherent about mothers and fathers that would inspire those words. For example, if mothers habitually made a "ma-ma" sound, "mama" would make sense onomatopoeically. Not sure why mothers would do that, though? If the word "papa" were onomatopoeic, I'd guess it meant something that hits twice. Like a style of soft drumming? *pa pa* As a parallel, I recall one Australian indigenous word for "rifle" was "boroong-boroong" (or something like). Now that's onomatopoeia! :D

Perhaps. "Onomatopoeia" is a name or word given that mimics the sound something makes. The following is onomatopoeia: meow=cat buzz=bee/ fly/ insect tick tock=clock "Mama" and "papa" are names a child would call "mother" and "father." Rarely is it ever used in an onomatopoeic way to mimic the sound of a baby. (In that context, yes, it would be onomatopoeic.) The names "mama" and "papa" probably came from a baby's/ child's ability to mimic sounds, but not be able to say a full word. Babies really enjoy babbling nonsense! This is how they first learn to speak. So, to sum it up: If you were to use "mama" or "papa in an onomatopoeic way, you should be mimicking a baby. Otherwise, it is a name given to parents. Source: self, American English