http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDwQxQEwAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fviewer%3Fa%3Dv%26q%3Dcache%3AtdHwSApAceYJ%3Asandlersignlab.haifa.ac.il%2Fhtml%2Fhtml_eng%2Firit_articles%2F86.4.meir.pdf%2BIconicity%2Band%2Bmetaphor%3A%2BConstraints%2Bon%2Bmetaphorical%2Bextension%2Bof%2Biconic%2Bforms%26hl%3Den%26gl%3Dus%26pid%3Dbl%26srcid%3DADGEESivrw1N2YYo8w8uhP-3uVVOofDeK1iko8xYD_M8IYfZkQsQPr_rkZ_LlvgCspMAmeWkBODYBpc0LTGw0xC5cTZ5IyibOHfpk4PbVakeZyPO9bXhkRfpBBJKY5mBW1T-XhjWjkon%26sig%3DAHIEtbRApV9iCLhrwsC931cKs6F8b-W8gQ&ei=CVixUP3WBpHviQL2xYGgCQ&usg=AFQjCNFOEen_LRQvA6illLbpsOwScAbjOw

“Turning to nonderived lexical items, phenomena such as onomatopoeia, sound symbolism, and mimetics (also called ‘ideophones’; see Diffloth 1972) indicate that even words are not as arbitrary as they may seem to be, since phonological features may be used in an iconic fashion.”

— Irit Meir, Iconicity and Metaphor, Constraints on metaphorical extension of iconic forms