6.50 Qs: Do; Reduplication; Have) of; C-Insertion

[The Linguist List]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List:  Vol-6-50. Mon 16 Jan 1995. ISSN: 1068-4875. Lines: 129
 
Subject: 6.50 Qs: Do; Reduplication; Have) of; C-Insertion
 
Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Texas A&M U. <aristar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at emunix.emich.edu>
 
Asst. Editors: Ron Reck <rreck at emunix.emich.edu>
               Ann Dizdar <dizdar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
               Ljuba Veselinova <lveselin at emunix.emich.edu>
               Liz Bodenmiller <eboden at emunix.emich.edu>
 
                           REMINDER
[We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually
best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is
then  strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list.   This policy was
instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we
would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.]
 
-------------------------Directory-------------------------------------
 
1)
Date:         14 Jan 95 10:36:01 SAST-2
From: RAJ at beattie.uct.ac.za
Subject:      affirmative 'do'
 
2)
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 11:15:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: LJONSSON at MACALSTR.EDU
Subject: Reduplicative constructions and polarity
 
3)
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 1995 18:28:55 -0600 (CST)
From: Larry G Hutchinson (hutchin at maroon.tc.umn.edu)
Subject: Re: 6.39 have) of
 
4)
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 1995 22:42:40 -0500
From: JPKIRCHNER at aol.com
Subject: C-insertion
 
-------------------------Messages--------------------------------------
1)
Date:         14 Jan 95 10:36:01 SAST-2
From: RAJ at beattie.uct.ac.za
Subject:      affirmative 'do'
 
I am working on a construction in a Cape Town dialect that involves
the use of unstressed 'do' in affirmative contexts: e.g. 'I did go to
the hall yesterday'.  No contrastive pre-supposition is intended;
speakers appear to be simply highlighting a 'salient' activity
(there are present tense parallels too). Although this is
traditionally believed to be a 'contact' feature of Cape Town
English, it sounds to me rather like a relic from early modern
standard English, reinforced by natural (second language)
acquisition.  The form does occur (though possibly with different
pragmatics) in child language acquisition (I have sporadic &
unsystematic examples from Britain); but is soon weeded out of the
grammar.
    QUESTION: Does anyone know of any dialect (any L1 or L2
form of English; child language, early interlanguage etc.) that has
something similar?  (I am familiar with early modern standard and
earlier forms of 'do'; with affirmative 'do' in Ireland and the south-
 west of England - the pragmatics there are different, incidentally:
'habitual' is not a function associated with the Cape Town dialect.)
Thanks:
Raj Mesthrie
Dept of Linguistics
University of Cape Town
raj at beattie.uct.ac.za
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 11:15:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: LJONSSON at MACALSTR.EDU
Subject: Reduplicative constructions and polarity
 
Moravscik (in Greenberg's Language Universals) notes that reduplicative
constructions that do not fulfill a purely grammatical function usually
intensifies the base morpheme.  Sometimes, though, it may actually have
the exact opposite function: it de-intensifies the base morpheme.  I am
interested in the connection between this process and the process by
which the literal message of a sarcastic utterance assumes the exact
opposite meaning by means of a conceptually similar feature: exaggeration
(of, say, amplitude, duration, pitch, or clarity).  Does anyone know of
any further research on this particular phenomenon?  Any speculations?
Perhaps there is an intimate connection here with the polarity-based
cognitive mapping Givon (in Negation in Language: Pragmatics, Function,
Ontology) proposed?
Sincerely,
Anders
 
Lars Anders Joensson
Macalester College
email: ljonsson at macalstr.edu
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 1995 18:28:55 -0600 (CST)
From: Larry G Hutchinson (hutchin at maroon.tc.umn.edu)
Subject: Re: 6.39 have) of
 
It seems to me that the use of HAVE + SIMPLE PAST is rapidly increasing
in the U.S. It's showing up now in newspapers and on television, and,
perhaps most tellingly, in the speech of acquaintances who I am sure did
not have it a few years ago.
 
My first thought was that this had something to do with the HAVE) OF
reanalysis, but I have now heard too many instances of emphatic "have" to
believe this. Examples such as "Even if he HAD went earlier, ..." abound.
I find these examples easy to spot because I still wince whenever I hear one.
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
4)
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 1995 22:42:40 -0500
From: JPKIRCHNER at aol.com
Subject: C-insertion
 
Can anyone guide me to material documenting insertion of consonsants to break
up impermissible vowel clusters, in which the choice of consonant is NOT
conditioned by the nature of its surrounding vowels?  I'm thinking, for
example, of glides between non-high vowels, or relicts of consonants that
were once there historically, but are no longer considered underlyingly
present in the basic form of the word.  Thanks for any help.
 
James Kirchner
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-6-50.