To what extent are links between musical pitch and space universal, and to what extent are they shaped by language? There is contradictory evidence in support of both universality and linguistic relativity presently, leaving the question open. To address this, speakers of Dutch who talk about pitch in terms of spatial height and speakers of Turkish who use a thickness metaphor were tested in simple nonlinguistic space-pitch association tasks. Both groups showed evidence of a thickness-pitch association, but differed significantly in their height-pitch associations, suggesting the latter may be more susceptible to language. When participants had to match pitches to spatial stimuli where height and thickness were opposed (i.e., a thick line high in space vs. a thin line low in space), Dutch and Turkish differed in their relative preferences. Whereas Turkish participants predominantly opted for a thickness-pitch interpretation-even if this meant a reversal of height-pitch mappings-Dutch participants favored a height-pitch interpretation more often. These findings provide new evidence that speakers of different languages vary in their space-pitch associations, while at the same time showing such associations are not equally susceptible to linguistic influences. Some space-pitch (i.e., height-pitch) associations are more malleable than others (i.e., thickness-pitch).

中文翻译：

---

空间音高联想对语言的敏感性不同。

音高与空间之间的联系在多大程度上具有通用性，它们在多大程度上受到语言的影响？目前有矛盾的证据支持普遍性和语言相对性，这使问题悬而未决。为了解决这个问题，在简单的非语言空间音高关联任务中测试了讲荷兰语的人在空间高度方面的音高和使用厚度隐喻的土耳其语的人。两组均显示出粗细-音高关联的证据，但高度-音高关联明显不同，表明后者可能更容易受到语言的影响。当参与者不得不将音高与空间刺激相匹配时，高度和厚度是相对的（即，空间高的粗线与空间低的细线），荷兰人和土耳其人的相对偏好有所不同。尽管土耳其参与者主要选择了厚度-间距解释，即使这意味着高度-间距映射的反转，荷兰参与者也更倾向于高度-间距解释。这些发现提供了新的证据，表明使用不同语言的人在音高关联方面存在差异，而与此同时，这种关联也同样不易受到语言影响。一些空间间距（即高度间距）关联比其他关联（即厚度间距）更具延展性。同时显示出这种联想同样不易受到语言影响。一些空间间距（即高度间距）关联比其他关联（即厚度间距）更具延展性。同时显示出这种联想同样不易受到语言影响。一些空间间距（即高度间距）关联比其他关联（即厚度间距）更具延展性。