Re: Degrees of comparation

"Thomas R. Wier" wrote:
> But natural languages *are* perverse. No subsystem of a language will ever
> be entirely perfect or consistent in its organization.  In this case, it's very easy
> to imagine that the reduplication was a productive process at one stage of the
> language, later ceased to be productive, but left lots of words that still bore the
> mark of that process.  These words could then be available for semantic shifts
> like the one Nik describes.
Actually, it is still productive.  However, reduplication has several
uses, which aren't always predictable.  The major use is a kind of
augmentative, denoting a high, or possibly excessive, degree.  However,
some adjectives have little or no change when reduplicated.
Reduplication is used simply as part of the tendency to avoid
root-initial stress.  In some dialects, this is an absolute ban,
resulting in the few root-initially stressed words to shift stress to
the second syllable, monosyllables being reduplicated to allow this to
happen.  Actually, now that I think about it, maybe a *partial*
reduplication would be sufficient for that.

There are several irregular reduplications, occasionally due to phonetic
simplification, as in _mlalmlál_ -> _mlallál_, but most often due to
sound changes in early Uatakassí.  A few examples:
Makán (flat) - Mammakán (exceedingly flat, perfectly flat)
mëqán -> mëkán (q -> k before stressed vowels) -> makán (ë -> a)
mëqanmëqán -> manmëqán (q -> 0 before unstressed vowels; ë -> 0 before
vowels) -> mammakán

D'iá ([dza] or [dja]; bad) daiziá (evil)
dëgehá -> dëgeá (loss of h) -> dagiá (loss of e-i contrast)  -> daiá
(/gj/ -> /j/) -> d'iá (aGV(+stress) -> GV)
dëgehadëgehá -> dëgeadëgeá (loss of h) -> dëgeadgeá (loss of ë in
certain positions) -> dëgiadgiá -> dagiazgiá (ë -> a; stop -> fricative
syllable-final) -> daiaziá (/gj/ -> /j/) -> daiziá (VGa -> VG)

There are several that drop /a/ in the second part, due to the ë -> 0
sound change, for example, naváu/navaunváu (clean; exceedingly clean)

For d'iá, some dialects also have the form d'iad'iá for simply "bad",
retaining _daiziá_ for "evil", which probably wouldn't even be thought
of as a reduplicated form ... there might even be forms like
_daiziadaiziá_ "exceedingly evil" :-)

Hmm ... that's something to consider, exceptionally opaque forms might
be reanalyzed as independant words, with new, more transparent,
reduplications being used for the original word, so that d'iad'iá might
actually exist in the meaning "exceedingly bad"

I think that reduplicated color terms may tend to refer to the most
"typical" shade, like, maisiása (green), maisiasiása (leafy green), so,
mlallál would be used for sky-blue, tho some dialects would use it for
any blue.

Oh!  And adjectives that are formed from a noun plus -iása form the
reduplicated form by only reduplicating that suffix, as -iasiása, as in
the above example (historically, derived from a word for "leaf")

As you can see, I'm still not 100% decided on reduplication in
Uatakassí.  :-)

--
Cenedl heb iaith, cenedl heb galon
A nation without a language is a nation without a heart - Welsh proverb
ICQ: 18656696
AIM Screen-Name: NikTaylor42

Reply