The relationship between word formation and the meanings words convey has been a philosophical concern since antiquity. Scholars across disciplines have long engaged with the issue of form–meaning mapping, giving rise to two competing perspectives: one emphasizing the arbitrariness of language, and the other advocating sound symbolism (for details, see Perniss et al. 2010; Lockwood and Dingemanse 2015, among others). In Reichard’s (1944; 1950) words, linguistic forms have intrinsic power, but in Wittgenstein’s words (1953[2009]), they are externally empowered. This study investigates the linguistic and symbolic functions of [h]-sounds by proposing a relatively unique word dichotomy (REAL vs FAKE). The analysis integrates symbolic and orthographic evidence into broader debates on arbitrariness in linguistic representation. While language-related research has often treated the linkage between form and meaning as a product of social convention, experimental studies in other fields increasingly demonstrate that sound symbolism lies at the core of word formation (e.g., Stokoe 1991; Armstrong et al. 1995; Dingemanse et al. 2015). The central question, therefore, is not whether such a relationship exists, but rather how to uncover its subtle manifestations. Despite extensive inquiry, no universally accepted model of analysis has yet emerged. The present study contributes to the existing literature by bridging phonological theory, cognitive linguistics, and anthropological linguistics through a cross-linguistic examination of the symbolic nature of the [laryngeal]/h/ in both pronunciation and orthography. A survey of its use across ancient and modern languages reveals a division of labor: in classical and so-called “primitive” languages, /h/ retains a phonemic (primary) function, whereas in modern and non-primitive languages it has largely been reduced to an allophonic (secondary) status.
