1887
Volume 34, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0774-5141
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9676
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In the typological literature, a distinction is often drawn between reduplication (as a morphological process) and repetition (as a syntactic process) (Gil 2005). This squib reconsiders this distinction from the perspective of Construction Morphology (Booij 20102018Masini and Audring 2019). Drawing upon previously understudied phenomena in Tagalog, an Austronesian language of the Philippines, this paper demonstrates that the Construction Morphology approach provides a suitable framework for analyzing reduplication and repetition. It makes it possible to account for both similarities and differences between reduplication and repetition: both processes create a lexical unit with an iterative form and a conventionalized meaning, although they differ in the size and complexity of the lexical unit they create. Furthermore, this paper makes a strong case for the basic tenets of constructionist approaches, including a hierarchical lexicon and a lexicon-grammar continuum.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00051.nag
2020-12-31
2021-09-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Booij, Geert
    2010Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2012The Grammar of Words: An Introduction to Linguistic Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. (ed) 2018The Construction of Words: Advances in Construction Morphology. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑74394‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74394-3 [Google Scholar]
  4. Booij, Geert , and Jenny Audring
    2017 “Construction Morphology and the Parallel Architecture of Grammar.” Cognitive Science41: 277–302. 10.1111/cogs.12323
    https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12323 [Google Scholar]
  5. Finkbeiner, Rita , and Ulrike Freywald
    (eds) 2018Exact Repetition in Grammar and Discourse. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110592498
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110592498 [Google Scholar]
  6. Ghomeshi, Jila , Ray Jackendoff , Nicole Rosen , and Kevin Russell
    2004 “Contrastive Focus Reduplication in English (The Salad-Salad Paper).” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory22 (2): 307–357. 10.1023/B:NALA.0000015789.98638.f9
    https://doi.org/10.1023/B:NALA.0000015789.98638.f9 [Google Scholar]
  7. Gil, David
    2005 “From Repetition to Reduplication in Riau Indonesian.” InStudies on Reduplication, ed. by Bernhard Hurch , 31–64. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110911466.31
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110911466.31 [Google Scholar]
  8. Goldberg, Adele E.
    2006Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Haspelmath, Martin
    2011 “The Indeterminacy of Word Segmentation and the Nature of Morphology and Syntax.” Folia Linguistica45 (1): 31–80. 10.1515/flin.2011.002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2011.002 [Google Scholar]
  10. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
    2005 “Tagalog.” InThe Austronesian Languages of Asia and Madagascar, ed. by K. Alexander Adelaar , and Nikolaus P. Himmelmann , 350–376. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Inkelas, Sharon , and Cheryl Zoll
    2005Reduplication: Doubling in Morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511627712
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627712 [Google Scholar]
  12. Masini, Francesca
    2009 “Phrasal Lexemes, Compounds and Phrases: A Constructionist Perspective.” Word Structure2 (2): 254–271. 10.3366/E1750124509000440
    https://doi.org/10.3366/E1750124509000440 [Google Scholar]
  13. Masini, Francesca , and Jenny Audring
    2019 “Construction Morphology.” InThe Oxford Handbook of Morphological Theory, ed. by Jenny Audring , and Francesca Masini , 365–389. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Masini, Francesca , and Claudio Iacobini
    2018 “Schemas and Discontinuity in Italian: The View from Construction Morphology.” InThe Construction of Words: Advances in Construction Morphology, ed. by Geert Booij , 81–109. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑74394‑3_4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74394-3_4 [Google Scholar]
  15. Mattiola, Simone
    2019Typology of Pluractional Constructions in the Languages of the World. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.125
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.125 [Google Scholar]
  16. Moravcsik, Edith A.
    1978 “Reduplicative Constructions.” InUniversals of Human Languages, Volume 3: Word Structure, ed. by Joseph Greenberg , 297–334. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Rubino, Carl
    2005 “Reduplication: Form, Function and Distribution.” InStudies on Reduplication, ed. by Bernhard Hurch , 11–29. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Urdze, Aina
    (ed) 2018Non-Prototypical Reduplication. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110599329
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110599329 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00051.nag
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00051.nag
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Austronesian; construction morphology; reduplication; repetition; Tagalog
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error