Reduplication
Francesca Di Garbo
francescadigarbo at GMAIL.COM
Mon Mar 4 08:49:42 UTC 2013
Dear Scott and dear All,
As far as we now, the most common source of diminutive affixes
crosslinguistically is the noun for "child" (Jurafsky 1996). This
usually starts being used as a sort of classificatory noun to refer to
the young age of animate entities and gets gradually extended to
inanimate nouns where it marks small size with countable nouns and small
quantity with uncountable. Interestingly, there is no evidence for
affixal diminutives to derive from modifiers meaning "small'. On the
other hand, the diachronic development of diminutive reduplication is
very difficult to pin down, considering its intertwinment with other
grammatical functions (plurality, distributivity, attenuation etc.). It
would be interesting to investigate if the notion of /fragmentation
/used by Alex to make sense of the polysemy of reduplication in Mwotlap
is also applicable on the diachronic level. Also, it would be
interesting to see how common reduplicative patterns for diminutive
marking are across other Creoles (which I don't have any clue about).
As for the second point under discussion (whether on not diminutives can
express only size):
Synchronically, diminutives express evaluation of quantity (SMALL) and
quality (BAD or GOOD) and, as Paul points out, the two components are
not easy to tell apart when analysing the semantics of a diminutive
affix. However, as Östen's example suggests, it happens that the use of
a diminutive marker gets restricted to the encoding of size variation
only. I have the impression that this is very likely to happen in
languages with several different diminutive (and possibly augmentative)
affixes, where the different markers show different distributional
properties in terms of the meanings encoded. The Bantu languages are an
excellent illustration in this respect as the examples from Yeyi show.
Bantu languages (and other Niger-Congo languages with rich noun class
systems as the Atlantic languages) often have several noun classes which
are used to encode evaluative (diminutive and augmentative) meanings.
Interestingly, besides the range of uses pointed out by Frank with
respect to Yeyi, different diminutive classes in one language may
specialize in the encoding of different size nuances (small vs. tiny) as
in the example below from Lega, where class 12 expresses small size and
class 19 tiny size:
(7.3) Lega (Bantu) (Botne, 2003, p.430)
(a) mu-ntu
cl1-person
“person”
(b) *ka*-ntu
*cl12*-person
“small person”
(c)*si̹*-ntu
*cl19*-person
“tiny person”
Similarly, in those Bantu languages which have both diminutive noun
classes and diminutive suffixes, the two can co-occur on the same noun
to express tiny size, as in the examples from Venda given below. Here
the noun class 7 is used (among other things) to derive diminutive
nouns; when the diminutive noun class and the diminutive suffix
co-occur, the resulting meaning is 'tiny size'ː
(7.13) Diminutive marking in Venda (Bantu) (Poulos, 1990, p.88)
(a) tshi-kali
*cl7-*clay.pot
“small clay pot”
(b) tshi-kal-*ana*
*cl7-*clay.pot.*DIM*
“very small clay pot”
No endearing or derogatory meanings are implied in such cases.
References
Botne, R. (2003). Lega (Beya dialect) (d25). In D. Nurse & G. Philippson
(Eds.), The Bantu languages (pp. 422–449). London: Routledge.
Jurafsky, D. (1996). Universal tendencies in the semantics of the
diminutive. Language,
72, 533–578.
Poulos, G. (1990). A linguistic analysis of Venda. Pretoria: Via Afrika
Limited.
Best wishes,
Francesca Di Garbo (Stockholm University)
On 2013-03-04 00:19, Frank Seidel wrote:
> Dear Scott,
>
> while it has nothing to do with reduplication there are several
> constructions in Yeyi (Bantu, Niger-Congo) which pay significant
> attention to the size and shape of things. Nominal derivation covers,
> among other things, the semantics of hugeness, elongated items,
> smallness, and stuntedness. It is interesting to note for the
> discussion here, that derived elongated items in Yeyi often carry a
> connotation of thinness (which arguably can be viewed as a form of
> diminutive) and in terms of affective meaning items thusly derived are
> accompanied by a a specialized pejorative connotation of raggedness or
> inadequacy (which goes counter to the general assumption that all
> diminutive semantics go along with positive affective semantics of
> endearment etc.). For Yeyi this stands in contrast with the semantics
> of smallness accomplished by another derivative formation, whose
> primary semantic core is just that smallness (or youth). There are
> other interesting corelations of stuntedness and derogative, while on
> the other hand thickness or bulbousness are not accompanied or coupled
> with positive affective meaning.
>
> Smallness:
>
> (222)
>
>
>
> *mu-pundi_I *(*ba-*) ‘child’ > *ka-pundi_I * (*tu-*) ‘baby, toddler’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *mu-shoro_iii *(*mi-*) ‘head’ > *ka-shoro_iii * (*tu-*) ‘small head’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *li-ziba_I *(*ma-*) ‘pool of water, waterhole’ > *ka-ziba_I * (*tu-*)
> ‘small pool of water’
>
> The diminutive semantics of class 11 are not as general as the above
> and refer to thinness. This derivation often implies that the item at
> issue is inadequate or raggedy.
>
> (223)
>
>
>
> *mu-tshwa_II *(*mi-*) ‘rope’ > *ru-thswa_II * (*zun-*) ‘thin rope’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *mu-ndali_II *(*mi-*) ‘maize’ > *ru-ndali_II * (*zun-*) ‘thin plant of
> maize, long thin cone of maize’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *mu-kurukazi_II *(*ba-*) ‘old woman’ > *ru-kurukazi_II * (*zun-*)
> ‘thin (and possibly raggedy) old woman’
>
>
> Stunted shape and/or derogative:
>
> (227)
>
>
>
> *mu-kazi_iii *(*ba-*) ‘woman’ > *shi-kazi_iii * (*zi-*) ‘’bitch’ (fig.)’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *lu-wuyu_iii *(*ma-*) ‘baobab’ > *shu-wuyu_iii * (zu-) ‘short and
> thick baobab’
>
>
> Bigness/Thickness:
>
> (225)
>
>
>
> *mu-ne_II *(*mi-*) ‘finger’ > *li-ne_II * (*ma-*) ‘big/thick finger’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *shi-pata_II *(*zi-*) ‘fruit’ > *li-pata_II * (*ma-*) ‘big/thick fruit’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *mu-ti_II *(*mi-*) ‘tree’ > *li.ti_II * (*ma-*) ‘big tree’
>
>
> Hugeness/Bulbousness:
>
> (226)
>
>
>
> *shi-pata_II *(*zi-*) ‘fruit’ > *mu-pata_II * (*mi-*) ‘huge fruit’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *ì-tàfúrè_exf *(*zi-*) ‘table’ > *mù-tàfúrè_exf * (*mi-*) ‘huge table’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *li-yi_II *(*ma-*) ‘egg’ > *mu-yi_II * (*mi-*) ‘huge egg’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *lu-dzundzo_I *(*ma-*) ‘cloud’ > *mu-dzundzo_I * *(mi-)* ‘1. huge
> cloud 2. grey overcast sky’
>
> **
>
>
>
> *u-nyanda_I *(*ba-*) ‘barbelfish’ >*mu-nyanda_I * (*mi-*)
> ‘huge/bulbous barbelfish’)
>
> **
>
>
>
> *i-nshwi_II **(zin-)* ‘fish’ > *mu-nshwi_II * *(mi-)* ‘huge/bulbous fish’
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hoping that you find this usefull, despite the fact that reduplication
> does not factor here.
>
> Examples are from
> Seidel, Frank. 2008. A Grammar of Yeyi. A Bantu Language of Southern
> Africa. Koeln: Koeppe Verlag.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Frank
>
> --
> Frank Seidel, Ph.D.
> University of Florida
> Center for African Studies at the University of Florida
> 427 Grinter Hall - PO Box 115560
> Gainesville, FL 32611-5560
> Tel: 352.392.2183 <tel:352.392.2183>
> Fax: 352.392.2435 <tel:352.392.2435>
>
> Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Matthew Dryer <dryer at buffalo.edu
> <mailto:dryer at buffalo.edu>> wrote:
>
> Walman, a Papuan language, is similar to what Östen says about
> Russian. While the diminutive most typically conveys both small
> size and endearment, it can also be used only to express
> endearment or only to express small size.
>
> Matthew
>
>
> On 3/3/13 10:41 PM, Östen Dahl wrote:
>
> I am not sure if Paul's claim about the non-existence of
> diminutive constructions that refer only to small size implies
> that no diminutive could ever be used referring only to size,
> but at least in Russian there are diminutives that seem fairly
> free of evaluative or expressive meaning. For instance,
> "stol-ik" does not seem to mean anything but "small table":
> http://ru.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BA
>
> - östen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion List for ALT
> [mailto:LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
> <mailto:LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Paul
> Hopper
> Sent: den 3 mars 2013 22:14
> To: LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
> <mailto:LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: Reduplication
>
> Dear Alex, David and All,
>
> Thanks, Alex, for sharing this most interesting article. I
> notice that in fact even in the examples you cite, smallness
> is not present as an undiluted feature of
> reduplication--"distribution" or "fragmentation" is also
> involved, and sometimes also collectivity and plurality, which
> is (and you point this out also) characteristic of the meaning
> of reduplication in other Austronesian languages. You note a
> kind of paradox
> here: "distribution" is expansive, but diminution is contractive:
>
> "On touche ici du doigt un paradoxe de la réduplication
> nominale. D'un côté, l'effet d'éclatement suggère une
> croissance en étendue, comme si fragmenter une entité revenait
> à la multiplier, à la distribuer sur un grand nombre
> d'occurrences – d'où les valeurs plurielles et collectives.
> Mais par ailleurs, ce même processus de fragmentation revient
> à représenter la notion N sous une forme réduite, comme s'il
> s'agissait, cette fois-ci, de la diviser – d'où les valeurs
> diminutives attestées en mwotlap, comme dans d'autres langues
> austronésiennes." (from Alex François' article)
>
> I'm not convinced that we have examples of a diminutive
> construction that refers only to small size, but my confidence
> is wavering a little.
>
> - Paul
>
>
>
> hello,
>
> Reduplication is common in Austronesian languages, with a
> variety of
> meanings.
> One of these meanings (albeit a rare one, and
> non-productive) is
> diminutive.
>
> e.g. West Tarangan (Maluku, Indonesia): *seldi* 'shrimp' =>
> *sel**sel**di*'small shrimp' (Nivens 1993: 384)
>
> Manam (Oceanic, PNG): *moata* 'snake' =>
> *moata-moata* 'worm'
> (Lichtenberk 1983: 611)
>
> Mwotlap (Oceanic, Vanuatu): *Ä“y* 'lobster' =>
> *Ä“y**Ä“y*
> 'shrimp'
> (François 2004: 181)
> *qol* 'surgeonfish, larger
> variety' =>
> *qolqol*'surgeonfish, smaller variety'
>
> I mentioned these examples in my discussion of
> reduplication and its
> polysemy in the language Mwotlap.
> Reduplication is there only fully productive for verbs and
> adjectives;
> for nouns, it is a process of lexical derivation, which
> only affects
> some lexemes.
> Its semantics include (on nouns) diminutive, qualitative,
> plural, and
> (on
> verbs) pluractional, distributive, intensive, atelic,
> intensional,
> infinitive, etc. I tentatively proposed the notion of
> "fragmentation"
> as a way to capture reduplication's core underlying
> meaning in this
> language.
>
> François, Alexandre. 2004. La réduplication en mwotlap : les
> paradoxes du
> fractionnement<http://alex.francois.free.fr/data/AlexFrancois_2004_Reduplication_Mwotlap.pdf>.
> In Elizabeth Zeitoun (ed.), *Les langues
> austronésiennes<http://fdl.univ-lemans.fr/fr/liste-des-numeros/n23_24.html>.
> *Special issue of *Faits de langues* n°24: 177-195.
>
> Incidentally, Mwotlap does not use reduplication for
> hypocoristic
> functions. The diminutive meaning is thus here "pure",
> i.e. not
> contaminated by any affective meaning such as
> expressivity, endearment
> or familiarity — a situation Paul suggested should be
> “difficult,
> perhaps impossible†to find.
>
> best,
> Alex
>
> ********
>
> 2013/3/3 Anvita Abbi<anvitaabbi at gmail.com
> <mailto:anvitaabbi at gmail.com>>
>
> Dear Scott,
> Base reduplication for diminutives or for
> approximation of taste and
> color adjectives is common in most of the Indo-Aryan
> languages , e.g.
> *hari '*green'* *but *hari hari *'greenish' or *karwa
> *'bitter' but
> *karwa karwa *'somewhat bitter' in Hindi.
> Munda languages such as Kharia also have similar
> structures, e.g.
> *goej* 'dead' but *goej goej* 'dead-like'.
> Kurux, a North Dravidian language shares the structure
> with Hindi
> because of contact with IA languages.
> Austroasiatic languages such as Khasi is very rich in
> expressive
> morphology to indicate diminutive meaning but the non
> reduplicated
> part can not be considered a base as it has no meaning
> of its own.
> For details see *Reduplication in South Asian
> languages. An areal,
> typological and historical study *(1991) by Anvita
> Abbi.. Allied
> Publishers.
> Anvita
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Scott T.
> Shell<ay2493 at wayne.edu <mailto:ay2493 at wayne.edu>>
> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I'm looking for languages that reduplicate base
> forms to create
> diminutives.
>
> An example from Bamyili Creole:
>
> bragbrag 'froggy' pəpəp 'puppy'
> daŋgidaŋgi 'donkey' daldal 'dollie'
>
> Can anyone else help add to this list? It is
> important that the
> reduplication process carries no grammatical
> information. Also, I
> must point out that I am not looking for partial
> base reduplication.
> It must be the entire base.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott T. Shell
> Graduate Student, Wayne State University
>
>
>
> --
> Prof. Anvita Abbi
> Centre for Linguistics
> School of Language, Literature and Culture Studies
> Jawaharlal Nehru
> University New Delhi 110067 www.andamanese.net
> <http://www.andamanese.net>
> President: Linguistic Society of India
> URL:
> http://www.jnu.ac.in/FacultyStaff/ShowProfile.asp?SendUserName=anvita
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Alex François
> LACITO-CNRS<http://lacito.vjf.cnrs.fr/index_en.htm>, France;
> Australian National
> University<http://chl.anu.edu.au/disciplines/linguistics/index.php>,
> Canberra
> http://alex.francois.free.fr
>
>
> --
> Paul J. Hopper,
> Paul Mellon Distinguished Professor of Humanities Emeritus,
> Dietrich College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Carnegie
> Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, Tel. 412-683-1109
> <tel:412-683-1109>, Fax 412-268-7989 <tel:412-268-7989>.
>
> Adjunct Professor of Linguistics,
> Department of Linguistics,
> University of Pittsburgh.
>
> Senior External Fellow,
> School of Linguistics and Literature,
> Freiburg Institute for Advanced Studies (FRIAS), Freiburg
> i.Br., Germany
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20130304/d528ef15/attachment.htm>
More information about the Lingtyp
mailing list