Morphology

, 19:207

Reduplication in Kharia: the masdar as a phonologically motivated category

Original Paper
  • 102 Downloads

Abstract

At first glance, obligatory reduplication of monosyllabic lexemes in Kharia appears to be a means of deriving nouns and adjectives from verbs (cf. e.g. Abbi 1985, 1992; Biligiri 1965;76f.; Malhotra 1982) which originates from an earlier phonological constraint requiring all phonological words to be bisyllabic/bimoraic (Anderson and Zide 2002). As we argue in this study, however, although from a diachronic perspective reduplication in Kharia undoubtedly derives from a bisyllabic constraint on phonological words, a purely phonological analysis, as well as one in which reduplication merely serves to derive nouns or adjectives from verbs, is inadequate in our view, as reduplication is used to form the masdar, a grammatical category fulfilling a number of different functions: While the main or unmarked function of the masdar is undoubtedly secondary predication, it is also found in a highly marked construction in primary predication, where the bisyllabic constraint is actually redundant, as all primary predicates are at least bisyllabic even without reduplication. This analysis also differs from most studies dealing with reduplication in that the original function of what Inkelas and Zoll (2005) refer to as “morphological reduplication” was not semantic but rather purely phonological.

Keywords

Bimoraic Bisyllabic Kharia Masdar Munda Phonological word Reduplication 

Abbreviations

A

Active voice

ABL

Ablative

ADD

Additive focus

BEN

Benefactive

CAUS

Causative

CMPL

Complementizer

CNTR

Contrastive focus

CONV

Converbal

COP

Copula

C:TEL

Culminatory telic

D

Dual

ECHO

Reduplicated element in erstwhile compounds which is no longer in general use

EXCESS

Excessive (“v2”)

EXCL

Exclusive

FOC

Restrictive focus

GEN

Genitive

HUM

Human

INCL

Inclusive

INF

Infinitive

IPFV

Imperfective

IRR

Irrealis

ITER

Iterative

M

Middle voice

NEG

Negative morpheme

NHUM

Non-human

NML

“Nominalizer”

OBL

Oblique case

P

Plural

POSS

Inalienable possession

PRS

Present

PT

Past

PURP

Purposive

RDP

Reduplication

REP

(Non-obligatory) repetition of an entire phonological word (intensity, distribution, etc.)

S

Singular

SEQ

Sequential converb

S:ITER

Semel-iterative

TAM

Tense, aspect, mood

WG

Grammatical word

WP

Phonological word

References

  1. Abbi, A. (1985). Reduplicative structures: A phenomenon of the South Asian linguistic area. In V. Acson & R. L. Leeds (Eds.), For Gordon H. Fairbanks. Oceanic linguistics special publication (Vol. 20, pp. 159–171). Honolulu: University of Howaii press.Google Scholar
  2. Abbi, A. (1992). Reduplication in South Asian languages. An areal, typological and historical study. New Delhi: Allied Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, G. D. S. (2007a). The Munda verb. Typological perspectives. Trends in linguistics, studies and monographs.(Vol. 174). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, G. D. S. (2007b). Gta? bto?, Khmu? tmlùuy, Khasi kdor, Ksingmul pta:, Santali dalet’metah\({\tilde\varepsilon}\)kanae: An overview of Munda and Austroasiatic word structure. Paper held at the conference: Phonological words in South Asia and Southeast Asia, Universität Leipzig, September 19–20, 2007.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, G. D. S., & Zide, N. H. (2002). Issues in Proto-Munda and Proto-Austroasiatic nominal derivation: The bimoraic constraint. In M. A. Macken (Ed.), Papers from the 10th annual meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society (pp. 55–74). Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University, South East Asian Studies Program, Monograph Series Press.Google Scholar
  6. Anderson, S. R. (2005). Aspects of the theory of clitics. Oxford studies in theoretical linguistics, (Vol. 11). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bhat D.N.S. (1997) Noun–verb distinction in Munda Languages. In: Abbi A. (eds) Languages of tribal and indigenous peoples of india: The ethnic space. Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, pp 227–251Google Scholar
  8. Biligiri, H. S. (1965). Kharia. Phonology, grammar and vocabulary. Deccan college, building centenary and silver jubilee series: 3. Poona: Deccan College, Postgraduate and Research Institute.Google Scholar
  9. Blevins, J. (2007). Prosodic domains across time and space. Paper held at the conference: Phonological words in South Asia and Southeast Asia, Universität Leipzig, September 19–20, 2007.Google Scholar
  10. Bohas, G., & Guillaume J.-P. (1984). Étude des théories des grammairiens arabes. I: Morphologie et phonologie. PIFD, (Vol. 112). Damas: Institut Français de Damas.Google Scholar
  11. Borer H. (2005) Structuring sense. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Di Sciullo A., Edwin W. (1987) On the definition of word. MIT, Cambridge, MA/LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Evans N., Osada T. (2005) Mundari: The myth of a language without word classes. Linguistic Typology 9: 351–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Inkelas, S., & Zoll, C. (2005). Reduplication. Doubling in morphology. Cambridge studies in linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Malhotra, V. (1982). The structure of Kharia: A study of linguistic typology and language change. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru University.Google Scholar
  16. Peterson, J. (2006). Kharia. A South Munda language. Vol. I: Grammatical analysis, Vol. II: Kharia texts. Glossed, translated and annotated. Vol. III: Kharia-English lexicon. Unpublished Habilitationsschrift. Osnabrück: Universität Osnabrück.Google Scholar
  17. Pinnow H.-J. (1965) Kharia-Texte (Prosa und Poesie). Otto Harrassowitz, WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  18. Van Valin R.D. Jr. (2005) Exploring the syntax–semantics interface. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universität LeipzigLeipzigGermany
  2. 2.Universität GrazGrazAustria

Personalised recommendations