It is generally the case that there is no"natural" connection between a linguistic form and its meaning. The connection is quite arbitrary. We can't just look at the Arabic word-sur and, from its shape, for example, determine that it has a natural and obvious meaning any more than we can with its English translation form dog. The linguistic form has no natural or iconic" relationship with that hairy four-legged barking object out in the world. This aspect of the relationship between words and objects is described as arbitrariness. It is possible, as in a child's game to make words appear to"fit" or activity they indicate, as shown in Figure 2.1. the idea
However, this type of game only emphasizes the arbitrariness of the connection that normally exists between a word and its meaning There are some words in language with sounds that seem to"echo" the sounds of objects or activities and hence seem to have a less arbitrary connection. English crash, slurp, squelch or whirr However, these onomatopoeic examples are cuc words are relatively rare in human language For the majority of animal signals there does appear to be a clear connection between the conveyed message and the signal used to convey it. This impression may be closely connected the fact that, for any animal, the set of signals used in to communication is finite. Each variety of animal communication consists of a limited set of vocal or gestural Many of these forms are only used in specific situations forms. (to establish territory) or at particular times(to find a mate)