Reduplication - WikiHQ

thumb|220x124px | right | Occurrence of reduplication across world languages

In linguistics, reduplication is a morphological process in which the root or stem of a word, part of that, or the whole word is repeated exactly or with a slight change.

The classic observation on the semantics of reduplication is Edward Sapir's: "Generally employed, with self-evident symbolism, to indicate such concepts as distribution, plurality, repetition, customary activity, increase of size, added intensity, continuance." It is used in inflections to convey a grammatical function, such as plurality or intensification, and in lexical derivation to create new words. It is often used when a speaker adopts a tone more expressive or figurative than ordinary speech and is also often, but not exclusively, iconic in meaning. It is found in a wide range of languages and language groups, though its level of linguistic productivity varies. Examples can be found in language as old as Sumerian, where it was used in forming some color terms, e.g. "white", "black".

Reduplication is the standard term for this phenomenon in the linguistics literature. Other occasional terms include cloning, doubling, duplication, repetition, and tautonymy (when it is used in biological taxonomies, such as Bison bison).

Typological description

Form

Reduplication is often described phonologically in one of two ways: either (1) as reduplicated segments (sequences of consonants/vowels) or (2) as reduplicated prosodic units (syllables or moras). In addition to phonological description, reduplication often needs to be described morphologically as a reduplication of linguistic constituents (i.e. words, stems, roots). As a result, reduplication is interesting theoretically as it involves the interface between phonology and morphology.

The base is the word (or part of the word) that is to be copied. The reduplicated element is called the reduplicant, often abbreviated as RED or sometimes just R.

In reduplication, the reduplicant is most often repeated only once. In some languages, it can occur more than once, resulting in a tripled form, and not a duple as in most reduplication. Triplication is the term for this phenomenon of copying two times. Pingelapese has both forms. In this article, English translations of words are shown in apostrophes:

{| class="wikitable"

! Basic verb

! Reduplication

! Triplication

| '  'to sing'

| '  'singing'

| '  'still singing'

| '  'to sleep'

| '  'sleeping'

| '  'still sleeping'

Triplication occurs in other languages, e.g. Ewe, Shipibo, Twi, Mokilese, Min Nan (Hokkien), Stau.

Sometimes gemination (i.e. the doubling of consonants or vowels) is considered to be a form of reduplication. The term dupleme has been used (after morpheme) to refer to different types of reduplication that have the same meaning.

Full and partial

Full reduplication involves a reduplication of the entire word. For example, Kham derives reciprocal forms from reflexive forms by total reduplication:

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| 'ourselves'

| →

| 'we (to) us'

| 'themselves'

| →

| 'they (to) them'

| <cite>(Watters 2002)</cite>

Another example is from Musqueam Halkomelem "dispositional" aspect formation:

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| 'to capsize'

| →

| 'likely to capsize'

| 'to speak'

| →

| 'talkative'

| <cite>(Shaw 2004)</cite>

Partial reduplication involves a reduplication of only part of the word. For example, Marshallese forms words meaning 'to wear X' by reduplicating the last consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) sequence of a base, i.e. base+CVC:

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| kagir

| 'belt'

| →

| kagirgir

| 'to wear a belt'

| (kagir-gir)

| takin

| 'sock'

| →

| takinkin

| 'to wear socks'

| (takin-kin)

| <cite>(Moravsik 1978)</cite>

Many languages often use both full and partial reduplication, as in the Motu example below:

{| class="wikitable"

! Base verb

! Full reduplication

! Partial reduplication

| mahuta  'to sleep'

| mahutamahuta  'to sleep constantly'

| mamahuta  'to sleep (plural)'

| (mahuta-mahuta)

| (ma-mahuta)

Reduplicant position

Reduplication may be initial (i.e. prefixal), final (i.e. suffixal), or internal (i.e. infixal), e.g.

Initial reduplication in Agta (CV- prefix):

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| 'afternoon'

| →

| 'late afternoon'

| 'a long time'

| →

| 'a long time (in years)'

| (ŋa-ŋaŋaj)

| <cite>(Healey 1960)</cite>

Final reduplication in Dakota (-CCV suffix):

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| 'tall (singular)'

| →

| 'tall (plural)'

| (hãska-ska)

| 'good (singular)'

| →

| 'good (plural)'

| <cite>(Shaw 1980, Marantz 1982, Albright 2002)</cite>

Internal reduplication in Samoan (-CV- infix):

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| savali

| 'he/she walks' (singular)

| →

| savavali

| 'they walk' (plural)

| (sa-va-vali)

| alofa

| 'he/she loves' (singular)

| →

| alolofa

| 'they love' (plural)

| (a-lo-lofa)

| <cite>(Moravcsik 1978, Broselow and McCarthy 1984)</cite>

| le tamaloa

| 'the man' (singular)

| →

| tamaloloa

| 'men' (plural)

| (tama-lo-loa)

Internal reduplication is much less common than the initial and final types.

Copying direction

A reduplicant can copy from either the left edge of a word (left-to-right copying) or from the right edge (right-to-left copying). There is a tendency for prefixing reduplicants to copy left-to-right and for suffixing reduplicants to copy right-to-left:

Initial L → R copying in Oykangand Kunjen (a Pama–Nyungan language of Australia):

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| →

| 'rain'

| (ed-eder)

| →

| 'straight'

| (alg-algal)

Final R → L copying in Sirionó:

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| achisia

| →

| achisiasia

| 'I cut'

| (achisia-sia)

| ñimbuchao

| →

| ñimbuchaochao

| 'to come apart'

| (ñimbuchao-chao)

| <cite>(McCarthy and Prince 1996)</cite>

Copying from the other direction is possible although less common:

Initial R → L copying in Tillamook:

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| 'eye'

| →

| 'eyes'

| 'break'

| →

| 'they break'

| <cite>(Reichard 1959)</cite>

Final L → R copying in Chukchi:

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| nute-

| 'ground'

| →

| nutenut

| 'ground (abs. sg.)'

| (nute-nut)

| '

| 'gopher'

| →

| '

| 'gopher (abs. sg.)'

| <cite>(Marantz 1982)</cite>

Internal reduplication can also involve copying the beginning or end of the base. In Quileute, the first consonant of the base is copied and inserted after the first vowel of the base.

Internal L → R copying in Quileute:

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| 'he put it on'

| →

| 'he put it on (frequentative)'

| (tsi-ts-ko)

| 'snow'

| →

| 'snow here and there'

| (tu-t-ko:jo’)

| <cite>(Broselow and McCarthy 1984)</cite>

In Temiar, the last consonant of the root is copied and inserted before the medial consonant of the root.

Internal R → L copying in Temiar (an Austroasiatic language of Malaysia):

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| 'to shoot (perfective)'

| →

| 'to shoot (continuative)'

| 'to marry (perfective)'

| →

| 'to marry (continuative)'

| <cite>(Broselow and McCarthy 1984, Walther 2000)</cite>

A rare type of reduplication is found in Semai (an Austroasiatic language of Malaysia). "Expressive minor reduplication" is formed with an initial reduplicant that copies the first and last segment of the base:

{| style="line-height: 1.4em;" cellpadding="2"

| →

| 'to vomit'

| →

| 'appearance of nodding constantly'

| →

| 'monsoon rain'

| <cite>Diffloth 1973</cite>

With other morphological processes

All the examples above consist of only reduplication, which also often occurs with other phonological and morphological processes, such as vowel alternation, deletion and affixation of non-reduplicating material.

For instance, in Tz'utujil a new '-ish' adjective form is derived from other words by suffixing the reduplicated first consonant of the base followed by the segment . This can be written succinctly as '. Below are some examples:

'red' → 'reddish'  
'yellow' → 'yellowish'  
'water' → 'watery'     <cite>(Dayley 1985)</cite>

Somali has a similar suffix that is used in forming the plural of some nouns: -aC (where C is the last consonant of the base):

'ditch' → 'ditches'  
'lump of meat' → 'lumps of meat'  
'boy' → 'boys'     <cite>(Abraham 1964)</cite>

This combination of reduplication and affixation is commonly referred to as fixed-segment reduplication.

In Tohono O'odham initial reduplication also involves gemination of the first consonant in the distributive plural and in repetitive verbs:

'ox' → 'ox (distributive)'  (no-n-nowiu)
'rock' → 'rock (distributive)'  (ho-h-hodai)
'dig out of ground (unitative)' → 'dig out of ground (repetitive)'  (ko-k-kow)
'hit (unitative)' → 'hit (repetitive)'     <cite>(Haugen forthcoming)</cite>

Sometimes gemination can be analyzed as a type of reduplication.

Phonological processes, environment, and reduplicant-base relations

overapplication
underapplication
backcopying – A putative phenomenon of over-application in the reduplicant of a process triggered by the reduplicant in the base
base-reduplicant "identity" (OT terminology: BR-faithfulness)
tonal transfer/non-transfer

Function and meaning

In the Malayo-Polynesian family, reduplication is used to form plurals (among many other functions):

Malay rumah "house", rumah-rumah "houses".

In pre-1972 Indonesian and Malaysian orthography, 2 was shorthand for the reduplication that forms plurals: orang "person", orang-orang or orang2 "people". This orthography has resurfaced widely in text messaging and other forms of electronic communication.

The Nama language uses reduplication to increase the force of a verb: go, "look;", go-go "examine with attention".

Chinese and Japanese do not make morphological use of reduplication, but some words are formed this way, often with a collective sense: rén "person", rénrén "everybody"; toki "time", tokidoki "sometimes, from time to time". The iteration mark can be used to indicate reduplication, although in Chinese the iteration mark is no longer used in standard writing and is often found only in calligraphy.

Indo-European languages formerly used reduplication to form a number of verb forms, especially in the preterite or perfect. In the older Indo-European languages, many such verbs survive:

spondeo, spopondi (Latin, "I vow, I vowed")
(Greek, "I leave, I left")
(Greek, "I see, I saw"; these Greek examples exhibit ablaut as well as reduplication)
háitan, haíháit (Gothic, "to name, I named")

Those forms do not survive in Modern English but existed in its parent Germanic languages. Many verbs in the Indo-European languages exhibit reduplication in the present stem, rather than the perfect stem, often with a different vowel from that used for the perfect: Latin gigno, genui ("I beget, I begat") and Greek τίθημι, ἔθηκα, τέθηκα (I place, I placed, I have placed). Other Indo-European verbs used reduplication as a derivational process: compare Latin sto ("I stand") and sisto ("I remain"). All of those Indo-European inherited reduplicating forms are subject to reduction by other phonological laws.

Reduplication can be used to refer to the most prototypical instance of a word's meaning. In such a case, it is called contrastive focus reduplication. Finnish colloquial speech uses the process; nouns can be reduplicated to indicate genuinity, completeness, originality and being uncomplicated, as opposed to being fake, incomplete, complicated or fussy. It can be thought as compound word formation. For example, Söin jäätelöä ja karkkia, sekä tietysti ruokaruokaa. "I ate ice cream and candy, and of course food-food". Here, "food-food" is contrasted to "junk-food". One may say, "En ollut eilen koulussa, koska olin kipeä. Siis kipeäkipeä" ("I wasn't at school yesterday because I was sick. Sick-sick, that is"); that means that one was actually suffering from an illness instead of making up excuses, as usual.

ruoka "food", ruokaruoka "proper food", as opposed to snacks
peli "game", pelipeli "complete game", as opposed to a mod
puhelin "phone", puhelinpuhelin "phone for talking", as opposed to a pocket computer
kauas "far away", kauaskauas "unquestionably far away"
koti "home", kotikoti "home of your parents", as opposed to one's current place of residence

Words can be reduplicated with their case morphemes, as in lomalla lomalla ("away, on vacation, on leave"), where the adessive morpheme --lla appears twice.

In Swiss German, the verbs gah or goh "go", cho "come", la or lo "let" and aafa or aafo "begin" reduplicate when they are combined with other verbs.

In some Salishan languages, reduplication can mark both diminution and plurality, with one process being applied to each end of the word, as in the following example from Shuswap. Note that the transcription is not comparable to the IPA, but the reduplication of both initial and final portions of the root is clear: ṣōk!Emē'’n 'knife' reduplicated as ṣuk!ṣuk!Emen'’me’n 'plural small knives' (Haeberlin 1918:159). Reduplication has been found to be a major part of Salish languages.

Babbling in child language acquisition

At 25–50 weeks after birth, typically developing infants go through a stage of reduplicated or canonical babbling (Stark 198, Oller, 1980). Canonical babbling is characterized by repetition of identical or nearly identical consonant-vowel combinations, such as nanana or idididi. It appears as a progression of language development as infants experiment with their vocal apparatus and home in on the sounds used in their native language. Canonical/reduplicated babbling also appears at a time when general rhythmic behavior, such as rhythmic hand movements and rhythmic kicking, appear. Canonical babbling is distinguished from earlier syllabic and vocal play, which has less structure.

Examples

Indo-European

Proto-Indo-European

The Proto-Indo-European language used partial reduplication of a consonant and e in many stative aspect verb forms. The perfect or preterite (past) tense of some Ancient Greek, Gothic, Latin, Sanskrit, Old Irish, and Old Norse verbs preserve this reduplication:

Ancient Greek lúō 'I free' vs. léluka "I have freed"
Gothic hald "I hold" vs. haíhald (hĕhald) "I/he held"
Latin "I run" vs. "I ran" or "have run"
Old Irish "it breaks" vs. "it broke"
Old Norse rœ "I row" vs. rera (røra) "I rowed"
Sanskrit likhati 'he writes' vs. lilekha "he has written" or "he wrote"
A rare modern English reflex is do vs. did

Proto-Indo-European also used reduplication for the imperfective aspect. Ancient Greek preserves this reduplication in the present tense of some verbs. Usually, but not always, this is reduplication of a consonant and i, and contrasts with e-reduplication in the perfect:

dídōmi "I give" (present)
dédōka "I have given" (perfect)
* sísdō → hízō "I set" (present)
* sésdomai → hézomai "I sit down" (present; from sd-, zero-grade of root in *sed-os → ἕδος hédos "seat, abode")

Reduplication in nouns was rare, the best example being Proto-Indo-European 'wheel' (cf. Lithuanian kãklas 'neck', Sanskrit cakrá 'wheel', Greek κύκλος (kýklos) 'circle'), which doubled *kʷel-o- (cf. Old Prussian kelan 'wheel', Welsh pêl 'ball'), itself likely a deverbative of *kʷelh₁- 'to turn'.

English

English has several types of reduplication, ranging from informal expressive vocabulary (the first four forms below) to grammatically meaningful forms (the last two below). See also the alliteration section of the irreversible binomial article for cases like flip-flop and dribs and drabs.

Rhyming reduplication: Artsy-fartsy, boogie-woogie, okey-dokey, easy-peasy, hanky-panky, hocus-pocus, hoity-toity, hokey-pokey, holy moly, hurdy-gurdy, itsy-bitsy, namby-pamby, raggle-taggle, ragtag, razzle-dazzle, super-duper, teenie-weenie, willy-nilly, wingding.
Exact reduplications: Ack ack, aye-aye, back-to-back, blah-blah, boo-boo, bye-bye, chin-chin, choo-choo, chow-chow, dik-dik, doo-doo, fifty-fifty, gogo, ha ha, half-and-half, honk-honk, housey-housey, juju, klop-klop, mama, muumuu, night-night, no-no, papa, pee-pee, pip-pip, pom-pom, poo-poo, pooh-pooh, putt putt, so-so, ta-ta, there-there, tut-tut, tutu, wah-wah, wee-wee, yo-yo. While in many forms of English, exact reduplications can also be used to emphasise the strength of a word ("He wants it now now"), in South African English, 'now-now' means 'relatively soon'.
lexical reduplication: 'Each-each boy take one-one chair.' Indian English
Ablaut reduplications: In ablaut reduplications, the first vowel is almost always a high vowel or front vowel (typically ɪ as in hit) and the reduplicated vowel is a low vowel or back vowel (typically æ as in cat or ɒ as in top). Examples include: bric-a-brac, chit-chat, clip-clop, ding-dong, flimflam, flip-flop, hip-hop, jibber-jabber, kitty-cat, knick-knack, mishmash, ping-pong, pitter-patter, riffraff, sing-song, slipslop, splish-splash, tick-tock, ticky-tacky, tip-top, whiff-whaff, wibble-wobble, wishy-washy, zig-zag. Three-part ablaut sequences are less numerous, but are attested, e.g. tic-tac-toe, bing-bang-boom, bish-bash-bosh, splish-splash-splosh and "Live, Laugh, Love". Spike Milligan's poem "On the Ning Nang Nong" achieves comic effect by varying the ordering of vowels in such triples: There's a Nong Nang Ning/Where the trees go Ping!.
Shm-reduplication can be used with most any word; e.g. baby-shmaby, cancer-shmancer and fancy-shmancy. This process is a feature of American English from Yiddish, starting among the American Jews of New York City, then the New York dialect and then the whole country.

Of the above types, only shm-reduplication is productive, meaning that examples of the first three are fixed forms and new forms are not easily accepted.

Comparative reduplication: In the sentence "John's apple looked redder and redder," the reduplication of the comparative indicates that the comparative is becoming more true over time, meaning roughly "John's apple looked progressively redder as time went on." In particular, this construction does mean that John's apple is redder than some other apple, which would be a possible interpretation in the absence of reduplication, e.g. in "John's apple looked redder." With reduplication, the comparison is of the object being compared to itself over time. Comparative reduplication always combines the reduplicated comparative with "and". This construction is common in speech and is used even in formal speech settings, but it is less common in formal written texts. Although English has simple constructs with similar meanings, such as "John's apple looked ever redder," these simpler constructs are rarely used in comparison with the reduplicative form. Comparative reduplication is fully productive and clearly changes the meaning of any comparative to a temporal one, despite the absence of any time-related words in the construction. For example, the temporal meaning of "The frug seemed wuggier and wuggier" is clear: despite not knowing what a frug is or what wugginess is, it is easy to grasp that the apparent wugginess of the frug was increasing over time, as indicated by the reduplication of the comparative "wuggier".
Contrastive focus reduplication: Exact reduplication can be used with contrastive focus (generally where the first noun is stressed) to indicate a literal, as opposed to figurative, example of a noun, or perhaps a sort of Platonic ideal of the noun, as in "Is that carrot cheesecake or carrot cake cake?". This is similar to the Finnish use mentioned above. Furthermore, it is used to contrast "real" or "pure" things against imitations or less pure forms. For example, at a coffee shop one may be asked, "Do you want soy milk?" and respond, "No, I want milk milk." This gives the idea that they want "real" milk.
Intensificatory reduplication: Examples like a big, big problem, a long, long way, or very very difficult are instances of intensificatory reduplication. This type of reduplication is used to intensify the meaning of the original word. It's a way of expressing that something is not just big or long, but very big or very long. This type of reduplication is typically used only with a narrow range of words, and the meaning can often be inferred even if the specific combination is not a standard idiomatic expression. The more common items include gradable adjectives (e.g., big, great, deep, bad, old), along with intensificatory adverbs (e.g., very, really, so) and determiners (e.g., much). This is only possible for pre-head modifiers, and not with other syntactic functions. For example, a long long way is fine, but *the way is long long is ungrammatical, and I really really want it but not *I want it really really.

The double is—such as "What I want is, is to go home"—is in some cases a type of reduplication, which may be regarded as non-standard or incorrect.

More can be learned about English reduplication in , , and .

Dutch

While not common in Dutch, reduplication does exist. Most, but not all (e.g., pipi, blauwblauw (laten), taaitaai (gingerbread)) reduplications in Dutch are loanwords (e.g., koeskoes, bonbon, (ik hoorde het) via via) or imitative (e.g., tamtam, tomtom). Another example is a former safe sex campaign slogan in Flanders: Eerst bla-bla, dan boem-boem (First talk, then have sex; lit. First blah-blah, then boom-boom). In Dutch the verb "gaan" (to go) can be used as an auxiliary verb, which can lead to a triplication: we gaan (eens) gaan gaan (we are going to get going). The use of gaan as an auxiliary verb with itself is considered incorrect, but is commonly used in Flanders. Numerous examples of reduplication in Dutch (and other languages) are discussed by Daniëls (2000).

Afrikaans

Afrikaans makes use of reduplication to emphasize the meaning of the word repeated and to denote a plural or event happening in more than one place. For example, krap means "to scratch one's self," while krap-krap-krap means "to scratch one's self vigorously", whereas "dit het plek-plek gereën" means "it rained here and there". Reduplication in Afrikaans has been described extensively in the literature – see for example , and . Further examples of this include: "koes" (to dodge) being reduplicated in the sentence "Piet hardloop koes-koes weg" (Piet is running away while constantly dodging / cringing); "sukkel" (to struggle) becoming "sukkel-sukkel" (making slow progress; struggling on); and "kierang" (to cheat) becoming "kierang-kierang" to indicate being cheated on repeatedly.

Romance

In Italian reduplication was used both to create new words or word associations (tran-tran, via via, leccalecca) and to intensify the meaning (piano piano "very softly").

Common in Lingua Franca, particularly but not exclusively for onomatopoeic action descriptions:

Spagnoli venir...boum boum...andar; Inglis venir...boum boum bezef...andar; Francés venir...tru tru tru...chapar. ("The Spaniards came, cannonaded, and left. The English came, cannonaded heavily, and left. The French came, trumpeted on bugles, and captured it.")

Common uses for reduplication in French are the creation of hypocoristics for names, whereby Louise becomes Loulou, and Zinedine Zidane becomes Zizou; and in many nursery words, like dada 'horsie' (vs. cheval 'horse'), tati/tata 'auntie' (vs. tante 'aunt'), or tonton 'unkie' (vs. oncle 'uncle').

In Romanian and Catalan, reduplication is not uncommon and it has been used for both the creation of new words (including many from onomatopoeia) and expressions, for example,

Romanian: mormăi, țurțur, dârdâi, expressions talmeș-balmeș, harcea-parcea, terchea-berchea, țac-pac, calea-valea, hodoronc-tronc.
Catalan: així així, aixina aixana, balandrim-balandram, baliga-balaga, banzim-banzam, barliqui-barloqui, barrija-barreja, bitllo-bitllo, bub-bub, bum-bum, but-but, catric-catrac, cloc-cloc, cloc-piu, corre-corrents, de nyigui-nyogui, farrigo-farrago, flist-flast, fru-fru, gara-gara, gloc-gloc, gori-gori, leri-leri, nap-buf, ning-nang, ning-ning, non-non, nyam-nyam, nyau-nyau, nyec-nyec, nyeu-nyeu, nyic-nyic, nyigo-nyigo, nyigui-nyogui, passa-passa, pengim-penjam, pif-paf, ping-pong, piu-piu, poti-poti, rau-rau, ringo-rango, rum-rum, taf-taf, tam-tam, tau-tau, tic-tac, tol·le-tol·le, tric-trac, trip-trap, tris-tras, viu-viu, xano-xano, xau-xau, xerric-xerrac, xim-xim, xino-xano, xip-xap, xiu-xiu, xup-xup, zig-zag, ziga-zaga, zim-zam, zing-zing, zub-zub, zum-zum.

Slavic

The reduplication in the Russian language serves for various kinds of intensifying of the meaning and exists in several forms: a hyphenated or repeated word (either exact or inflected reduplication), and forms similar to shm-reduplication.

Celtic

Reduplication is a common feature of Irish and includes the examples rírá, ruaille buaille both meaning "commotion" and fite fuaite meaning "intertwined".

Indo-Aryan

Typically all Indo-Aryan languages, like Hindi, Punjabi, Gujarati and Bengali use partial or echoic reduplication in some form or the other. It is usually used to sound casual, or in a suggestive manner. It is often used to mean etcetera. For example, in Hindi, chai-shai (chai means tea, while this phrase means tea or any other supplementary drink or tea along with snacks). Quite common in casual conversations are a few more examples like shopping-wopping, khana-wana.

South Asian Indo Aryan languages are also rich in other forms of reduplication: morphological (expressives), lexical (distributives), and phrasal (aspectual).

morphological:

Reduplication also occurs in the 3rd gaṇa (verb class) of the Sanskrit language: bibheti "he fears", bibharti "he bears", juhoti "he offers", dadāti, "he gives". Even though the general idea is to reduplicate the verb root as a prefix, several sandhi rules change the outcome.

There are a number of constructions in Hindi and Urdu that are constructed by reduplication. Nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, pronouns, all have possibility of reduplications.

{| class="wikitable"

!(1) Reduplication of numbers

!(2) Reduplication of pronouns

!(3) Reduplication of nouns

!(4) Reduplication of adjectives

!(5) Reduplication of verbs

!(6) Reduplication of adverbs

Armenian

In Armenian, reduplication follows the same classification as in Turkish (see below), namely emphatic reduplication, echo reduplication, and doubling. Many appear as lexical entries in Armenian lexicographical sources.

Emphatic reduplication, one of two interpolated consonants (փ, ս), as in կարմիր (red), which becomes կասկարմիր (very red).
Echo Reduplication, as in սեղան-մեղան (table schmable).
Doubling, as in քիչ-քիչ (little [by] little)

Turkic

Turkish

In Turkish, there are three kinds of reduplication.

Emphatic reduplication, also called intensification: A word can be reduplicated partially, such that an emphatic stem is created to be attached to the adjective. This is done by taking the first syllable of the adjective, dropping the syllable-final phoneme, and adding one of four interpolated consonants (p, s, m, r). For example, kırmızı (red) becomes kıpkırmızı (very red); mavi (blue) becomes masmavi (very blue); yeşil (green) becomes yemyeşil (very green), and temiz (clean) becomes tertemiz ("spotless"). The added consonant is unpredictable, grammatically speaking; phonological studies, such as Wedel (1999), shed light on the subject.

Echo reduplication: similar to echo word in other languages, a word can be reduplicated while replacing the initial consonants (not being m, and possibly missing) with m. The meaning of the original word is broadened. For example, tabak means "plate(s)", and tabak mabak then means "plates, dishes and such". This can be applied to all kinds of words, as in yeşil meşil meaning "green, greenish, whatever". Although not used in formal written Turkish, it is a standard accepted construction.

Doubling: A word can be reduplicated totally, turning it into an adverb with a related meaning. For example, zaman zaman (time time) meaning "time to time" or "occasionally"; uzun uzun (long long) meaning "at length." This type is used also in formal Turkish, especially in literature. There are a lot of reduplications in this category which do not, if used as one word, have a place in the Turkish language's vocabulary but is used solely in this way. These words are called mimetic in linguistics. An example is 'şırıl şırıl' (used for the sound of a waterfall). They try to give sounds to not only audible but also non-audible phenomena. For example, 'mışıl mışıl' is used for sleeping soundly.

Dravidian

Reduplication is also used in Dravidian languages like Telugu for the same purpose.

Telugu

phrasal:

Tamil

The Tamil language uses many reduplications, both in spoken (colloquial) and in formal usage. Reduplications are called irattaik kilavi (இரட்டைக் கிளவி) in Tamil grammar.

baga-baga () - wolfing down food
busu-busu () – soft and bushy
cala-cala () - sound of breeze, bubbling brook, cascading water
cara-cara () - sound of objects rubbing against one another
choda-choda () – marshy, waterlogged
chuDa-chuDa () – piping hot
cuL-cuL () - sharpness of pain
daga-daga () - blazing, shining, sparkling
gaDa-gaDa () - quickly, rapidly
gaNIr-gaNIr () - strident (like the sound of a bell)
gaba-gaba () - wolfing down food
galIr-galIr () - sound of walking ankle bracelets
gama-gama () - fragrant
gara-gara () – crunchy (as in food), gravely (as in voice)
giDu-giDu () – quickly, fast
giru-giru () - giddy
gubu-gubu () - pouring forth (like smoke, flood, etc.)
jilu-jilu, jil-jil () - cool (temperature)
kIchu-kIchu () - screeching, like the sound of parrots
kaDu-kaDu () - angry
kaNa-kaNa () - warm, hot
kala-kala () - lively
kozha-kozha () – slimy, gooey
kozhu-kozhu () – plump
kuLu-kuLu () - cool (temperature)
mAngu-mAngu () – laboriously
maDa-maDa () – quickly, fast
masa-masa () – sluggish, lethargic
minu-minu () - sparkling, twinkling
mozhu-mozhu () – smooth (surface)
paDa-paDa () - fluttering (e.g., heartbeat)
paLAr-paLAr () - sound of slapping
paLIr-paLIr () - flash of light
paLa-paLa () – glittering, shiny
paLic-paLic () - sparkling, twinkling
para-para () - hurried
pisu-pisu () - sticky
pola-pola () - easily falling off (like fruits from a tree)
sora sora () – rough (the sound produced when rubbing back and forth on a rough surface)
Tak-Tak () - quickly, rapidly
taLa-taLa () - lush (as in a lush plant/orchard)
tara-tara () - sound of dragging
tazu-tazu () - tongue-tied
tiru-tiru () - guilty, caught-red-handed look
toLa-toLa () - hanging loose (as in loose fitting)
toNa-toNa () - annoyingly incessant
turu-turu () - brisk, active
vazha-vazha () – smooth, slippery
veDa-veDa () – shaking, trembling
vicuk-vicuk () - sound of walking fast
viru-viru () – energetically (also, spicy)

Bantu

Reduplication is a common phenomenon in Bantu languages and is usually used to form a frequentive verb or for emphasis.

Swahili piga 'to strike'; pigapiga 'to strike repeatedly'
Ganda okukuba (oku-kuba) 'to strike'; okukubaakuba (oku-kuba-kuba) 'to strike repeatedly, to batter'
Chewa tambalalá 'to stretch one's legs'; tambalalá-tambalalá to stretch one's legs repeatedly'

Popular names that have reduplication include

Bafana Bafana
Chipolopolo
Eric Djemba-Djemba
Lomana LuaLua
Ngorongoro

Semitic

Semitic languages frequently reduplicate consonants, though often not the vowels that appear next to the consonants in some verb form. This can take the shape of reduplicating the antepenultimate consonant (usually the second of three), the last of two consonants, or the last two consonants.

Hebrew

In Hebrew, reduplication is used in nouns, adjectives, adverbs and verbs for various reasons:

For emphasis: in le'at le'at, where the adverb "slowly" is duplicated to mean "very slowly". In the slangism gever gever, the noun "man" is duplicated to mean a "very manly man".
To mean "one by one":
yom yom is based on "day", and means "every day, day by day".
para para is based on "cow", and literally means "cow by cow", referring to "one thing at a time". This is possibly a folk etymology, and a derivation from Spanish "para" meaning "stop" is possible.
To create a diminutive: by reduplicating the last two consonants (bi-consonantal reduplication):
kelev "dog"
klavlav "puppy"
khatul "cat"
khataltul "kitten"
lavan "white"
levanban "whitish"
katan "small"
ktantan "tiny"
To create secondary derivative verbs: by reduplicating the root or part of it:
dal () "poor" > dilel () "to dilute", and also dildel () "to impoverish, weaken".
nad () "to move, nod" > nadad () "to wander" but also nidned () "to swing" and - due to phono-semantic matching of the Yiddish lexical item נודיען nídyen / núdzhen "to bore, bother" - also "to bother, pest, nag, annoy".
tzakhak () "to laugh" > tzikhkek () "to chuckle".
For onomatopoeia:
שקשק shikshék "to make noise, rustle".
kawakawa (Piper excelsum) after the tropical kawa (Piper methysticum, hence the former conveying a "kawa-ish" meaning),
several ferns known as piupiu (Parablechnum and others in their family) named after their fronds' shape resembling those of the piu palm or Pritchardia pacifica.

Mortlockese

The Mortlockese language is a Micronesian language spoken primarily on the Mortlock Islands. In the Mortlockese language, reduplication is used to show a habitual or imperfective aspect. For example, /jææjæ/ means "to use something" while the word /jæjjææjæ/ means "to use something habitually or repeatedly". Reduplication is also used in the Mortlockese Language to show extremity or extreme measures. One example of this can be seen in /ŋiimw alɛɛtɛj/ which means "hate him, her, or it". To mean "really hate him, her, or it," the phrase changes to /ŋii~mw al~mw alɛɛtɛj/.

Pingelapese

Pingelapese is a Micronesian language spoken on the Pingelap atoll and on two of the eastern Caroline Islands, called the high island of Pohnpei. Pingelapese utilizes both duplication and triplication of a verb or part of a verb to express that something is happening for certain duration of time. No reduplication means that something happens. A reduplicated verb means that something is happening, and a triplication means that something is still happening. For example, saeng means 'to cry' in Pingelapese. When reduplicated and triplicated, the duration of this verb is changed:

saeng – cries
saeng-saeng – is crying
saeng-saeng-saeng – is still crying

Few languages employ triplication in their language. In Micronesia, Pingelapese is one of only two languages that uses triplication, the other being Mokilese. Reduplication and triplication are not to be confused with tense. In order to make a phrase past, present, or future tense, a temporal phrase must be used.

Rapa

Rapa is the French Polynesian language of the island of Rapa Iti. In terms of reduplication, the indigenous language known as Old Rapa uses reduplication consistent to other Polynesian languages. Reduplication of Old Rapa occurs in four ways: full, rightward, leftward, and medial. Full and rightward are generally more frequently used as opposed to the leftward and medial. Leftward and medial only occur as CV reduplication and partial leftward and medial usually denote emphasis.

Example of reduplication forms:

{| class="wikitable"

!Base form

!Reduplicated form

!Full reduplication

kini 'pinch'
kati 'bite'

kinikini 'pinch skin'
katikati 'nibble'

!Rightward reduplication

māringi 'pour'
taka'uri 'go backward'
pātī 'bounce'
ngaru 'wave'

māringiringi 'pour continuously'
taka'uri<nowiki/>'uri 'roll back and forth'
pātītī 'splash (of raindrops)'
ngaruru 'sea sick'

!Leftward reduplication

komo 'sleep'
kume 'drag'

kokomo 'deep sleep'
kukume 'large, flat leaf seaweed'

!Medial reduplication

maitaki 'good; well'

maitataki 'excellent; very well'

For the Rapa Language the implementation of reduplication has specific implications. The most evident of these are known as iterative, intensification, specification, diminutive, metaphorical, nominalizing, and adjectival.

Iterative:

naku 'come, go' → nakunaku 'pass by frequently'
ipuni 'hide' → ipunipuni 'hide and seek'

Intensification:

mare 'cough' → maremare 'cough forcefully'
roa 'much' → roroa 'very much'
maki 'sick' → makimaki 'really sick'

Specification:

kini 'to pinch' → kinikini 'pinch skin'

Diminutive:

paki 'slap, strike' → pakipaki 'clap'
kati 'bite' → katikati 'nibble'

Metaphorical (typically comparing an animal action with a human action):

kapa 'mime with hands' → kapakapa 'flap wings (a bird)'
mākuru 'detach oneself' → mākurukuru 'shed or molt'
taŋi 'Yell' → taŋitaŋi 'chirp (a bird)'

Nominalizing:

para 'finished' → parapara 'leftovers'
Panga'a 'divide' → panaga'anga'a 'a break, a divide'

Adjectival:

repo 'dirt, earth' → reporepo 'dirty'
pake 'sun' → pakepake 'shining, bright'

Tagalog

Philippine languages are characterized as having the most productive use of reduplication, especially in Tagalog (the basis of the Filipino language). Reduplication in Tagalog is complex. It can be roughly divided into six types:

Monosyllabic; e.g. olol ("mad")
Reduplication of the final syllable; e.g. himaymay ("separate meat from bones"), from himay (same meaning)
Reduplication of the final syllable of a disyllabic word, where the added syllable is created from the first consonant of the first syllable and the last consonant of the second syllable; e.g. kaliskis ("[fish] scale"), from kalis ("to scrape")
Reduplication of the initial syllable of the root; e.g. susulat ("will write"), from sulat ("to write")
Full reduplication; e.g. araw-araw ("every day"), from araw ("day" or "sun")
Combined partial and full reduplication; e.g. babalibaligtad ("turning around continually", "tumbling"), from baligtad ("reverse")

They can further be divided into "non-significant" (where its significance is not apparent) and "significant" reduplication. 1, 2, and 3 are always non-significant; while 5 and 6 are always significant. 4 can be non-significant when used for nouns (e.g. lalaki, "man"). Many Burmese words, especially adjectives such as ('beautiful' ), which consist of two syllables (when reduplicated, each syllable is reduplicated separately), when reduplicated ( → 'beautifully' ) become adverbs. and that later, certain initial consonants were deleted, leaving the VCV pattern of Proto-Basque:

{|align="center" border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2"

!Pre-Proto-Basque

!Proto-Basque

!Modern Basque

!English

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*dar → *da-dar

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*adaR

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|horn (anatomy)

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*dats → *da-dats

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*adats

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|long hair

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*der → *de-der

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*edeR

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|beautiful

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*dol → *do-dol

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*odoL

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|blood

|---

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*gor → *go-gor

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*gogoR

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|hard

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*nal → *na-nal

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*anaL

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|can, to be able

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*nan → *na-nan

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*anan-tz

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|to forget

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*nin → *ni-nin

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*inin-tz

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|dew

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*nol → *no-nol

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*onoL

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|board

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*nur → *nu-nur

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*unuR

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|hazelnut

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*zal → *za-zal

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*azal

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|bark

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*zen → *ze-zen

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*zezen

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|bull

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*ten → *te-ten

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*eten

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|

|-----

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*ran → *ra-ran

|bgcolor=whitesmoke|*aran

|bgcolor=aliceblue|

|bgcolor=honeydew|plum

Notes

Citations

References

Print.
Print.

Bibliography

Abraham, Roy. (1964). Somali-English dictionary. London, England: University of London Press.
Albright, Adam. (2002). A restricted model of UR discovery: Evidence from Lakhota. (Draft version).
Borbor, Dariush. (2023). Analytical Comparative Etymological Dictionary of Reduplication in the Major Languages of the Middle East and Iran. Contemporary Studies in Descriptive Linguistics (No. 55). Peter Lang. .
Dayley, Jon P. (1985). Tzutujil grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Diffloth, Gérald. (1973). Expressives in Semai. In P. N. Jenner, L. C. Thompson, and S. Starsota (Eds.), Austroasiatic studies part I (pp. 249–264). University Press of Hawaii.
Fabricius, Anne H. (2006). A comparative survey of reduplication in Australian languages. LINCOM Studies in Australian Languages (No. 03). Lincom. .
Gomez, Gale Goodwin, and Hein van der Voort, eds. Reduplication in indigenous languages of South America. Brill, 2014.
Haugen, Jason D. (forthcoming). Reduplicative allomorphy and language prehistory in Uto-Aztecan. (Paper presented at Graz Reduplication Conference 2002, November 3–6).
Harlow, Ray. (2007) Māori: a linguistic introduction Cambridge University Press. . 127–129
Healey, Phyllis M. (1960). An Agta grammar. Manila: The Institute of National Language and The Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Hurch, Bernhard (Ed.). (2005). Studies on reduplication. Empirical approaches to language typology (No. 28). Mouton de Gruyter. .
Inkelas, Sharon; & Zoll, Cheryl. (2005). Reduplication: Doubling in morphology. Cambridge studies in linguistics (No. 106). Cambridge University Press. .
Marantz, Alec. (1982). Re reduplication. Linguistic Inquiry 13: 435–482.
McCarthy, John J. and Alan S. Prince. (1986 [1996]). Prosodic morphology 1986. Technical report #32. Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science. (Unpublished revised version of the 1986 paper available online on McCarthy's website: http://ruccs.rutgers.edu/pub/papers/pm86all.pdf).
McCarthy, John J.; and Prince, Alan S. (1995). Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. In J. Beckman, S. Urbanczyk, and L. W. Dickey (Eds.), University of Massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics 18: Papers in optimality theory (pp. 249–384). Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistics Students Association. (Available online on the Rutgers Optimality Archive website: https://web.archive.org/web/20090423020041/http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?id=568).
McCarthy, John J.; and Prince, Alan S. (1999). Faithfulness and identity in prosodic morphology. In R. Kager, H. van der Hulst, and W. Zonneveld (Eds.), The prosody morphology interface (pp. 218–309). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Available online on the Rutgers Optimality Archive website: https://web.archive.org/web/20050525032431/http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?id=562).
Moravcsik, Edith. (1978). Reduplicative constructions. In J. H. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of human language: Word structure (Vol. 3, pp. 297–334). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Oller, D. Kimbrough. 1980. The emergence of the sounds of speech in infancy, in Child Phonology Vol. I, edited by G. H. Yeni-Komshian, J. F. Kavanaugh, and C. A. Ferguson. Academic Press, New York. pp. 93–112.
Shaw, Patricia A. (1980). Theoretical Issues in Dakota Phonology and Morphology. Garland Publ: New York. pp. ix + 396.
Shaw, Patricia A. (2004). Reduplicant order and identity: Never trust a Salish CVC either?. In D. Gerdts and L. Matthewson (Eds.), Studies in Salish linguistics in honor of M. Dale Kinkade. University of Montana Occasional Papers in Linguistics (Vol. 17). Missoula, MT: University of Montana.
Watters, David E. (2002). A grammar of Kham. Cambridge grammatical descriptions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. .
Wilbur, Ronnie B. (1973). The phonology of reduplication. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois. (Also published by Indiana University Linguistics Club in 1973, republished 1997.)

External links

Reduplication (Lexicon of Linguistics)
What is reduplication? (SIL)
Echo-Word Reduplication Lexicon
Exhaustive list of reduplications in English
List of contrastive focus reduplications in English
List of English reduplications in Wiktionary
graz database on reduplication (gdr) Institute of Linguistics, University of Graz
La réduplication à m dans l’arabe parlé à Mardin