Yes. A tiny bit.
A faulty survey of 0, 2, 3.x, and 5 core materials reveals nothing like you're asking. (But you found it, right there in the 3.5 MM.)
But 1e dangles two tiny tidbits your way:
Strength is a measure of muscle, endurance, and stamina combined. For purposes of relating this ability to some reality, assume that a character with a strength of 3 is able to lift a maximum of 30 pounds weight above his or her head in a military press, while a character with 18 strength will be able to press 180 pounds in the same manner. (AD&D PHB p.9, "Strength," emphasis mine.)
Fairly straightforward, and one can amuse oneself imagining EGG and friends military-pressing boxes of 0e materials in the garage as they developed this description.
Brace yourself for the next one:
[Comeliness score] +1 to +6: As such an individual is simply ugly, the reaction evidenced will tend toward unease and a desire to get away from such brutishness as quickly as possible.
...
+14 to +17: Interest in viewing the individual is evidenced by those in contact, as he or she is good-looking. (AD&D Unearthed Arcana, "Comeliness," p.6.)
(Ugh.)
So how do you make your own scale?
You look at spells that change stats, you look at statted monsters/NPCs that have descriptive words tied to stats, you read decades-worth of arguments in Dragon magazine's Forum and Sage Advice columns.
Or, my favorite: talk it over with your players. During some downtime come up with a list of descriptors that you'll use, revisit and modify it over time, and come to a better understanding of your shared world. D&D is always best (IMO) when it's a bunch of people playing a game they made, rather than trying to play someone else's game.
1. Communicate your expectations with the players out of game
You and your players seem to have different expectations for how their character sheet should influence their roleplay. To you, it's immersion-breaking when a character acts differently than what their ability score suggests. To others, ability scores are just numbers that define mechanics and statistical outcomes, and don't directly restrict roleplay style.
It would benefit your campaign if you held an out-of-game discussion to directly address your roleplaying expectations and concerns. Discuss how you think characters should behave if their Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma is notably high or low. Get feedback. Make sure your players' preferences are in sync with yours.
Note that it may be an uphill battle if your players disagree. While a PC's ability scores affect what tasks they can do and their likelihood of success, they don't dictate roleplay or how the player should act out the character's thoughts and choices. Strictly speaking, it's the player's choice whether or not the PC's mental ability scores affect their roleplay, and to what degree. Assuming they wrote the character, they probably know best how the character would act and behave.
2. Use checks when players roleplay differently from their ability scores
If you want the ability scores to matter more, then include more dice-based challenges. This is where you have the system mechanics on your side. Characters with low WIS are less likely to succeed an WIS-demanding task. You can also prompt players to make checks, and then you can intervene regarding their character based on their success or failure on the check.
For example, if a player forgets or misses a clue but their character has high INT, have them make an INT check. On a success, they get a reminder or hint from the GM.
These checks can also be used (albeit sparingly) when players roleplay above their PC's capabilities. If the low-CHA character delivers an eloquent speech, ask them to make a CHA check or related skill. On a failure, you narrate that the audience wasn't particularly moved.
When intervening this way, make sure to use the “Yes, and” style of narration. Yes, the high-WIS druid walks toward the spider cave, and then has a flash of insight and realizes it's a bad idea. Yes, the low-CHA barbarian tries to speak politely and articulately, and the duke dislikes their untidy appearance and finds the speech unsettling. This way you still respect player agency, while maintaining narrative flow and nudging them to act more in-character.
3. Give in-game rewards for good roleplaying
Another way to encourage players is to give in-game incentives. Avoid big rewards like bonus XP, because that can seem unfair and subjective; from my experience, GMs who give roleplaying XP may seem biased toward certain players, which quickly results in player frustration.
Also avoid punishing players for what you consider bad roleplaying. Accusing players of bad roleplay when they are putting effort into roleplay could discourage them from roleplaying at all.
Instead, reward players for roleplaying in character and maintaining immersion. Use small rewards, like a temporary circumstance bonus for roleplaying in accordance with the ability score. This could encourage players to roleplay having low stats. They're already disadvantaged mechanically, and a temporary bonus would increase their odds of success.
Best Answer
A character with a High Intelligence but Low Wisdom might be incredibly book smart, but continually makes poor decisions, is absent-minded in the extreme, and tends to miss "little picture" stuff in favor of "big picture" stuff. This is the incredibly learned wizard who basically needs a handler wherever he goes due to his eccentricity. One example might be Walter Bishop from the TV show Fringe, if that makes sense.
A character with Low Intelligence but High Wisdom might be considered a dullard by society's standards, but has some matter of insight, or might be very attuned to the smaller things in life. This person might be illiterate or might be an idiot savant, but they have a way of picking up on the simple, straightforward solutions that other people miss, perhaps because they're going for the "big picture" stuff.
Those are just two popular ways to interpret the disparity in those two stats. I'm sure you could come up with other examples as well.