Remerciez-le!

Remerciez @Admin pour avoir partagé cet document gratuitement, de la manière la plus simple, en partageant sur les réseaux sociaux.

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonli

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rwrd20 WORD ISSN: 0043-7956 (Print) 2373-5112 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rwrd20 Reduplication as a morphological marker in the Indo-European languages: Reduplicated presents1 Georgios Giannakis To cite this article: Georgios Giannakis (1992) Reduplication as a morphological marker in the Indo-European languages: Reduplicated presents1, WORD, 43:2, 161-196, DOI: 10.1080/00437956.1992.12098298 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1992.12098298 Published online: 16 Nov 2020. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 202 View related articles GEORG/OS G/ANNAKIS----------- Reduplication as a morphological marker in the Indo-European languages: Reduplicated presents 1 Abstract. Reduplication is a very productive morphological device in the grammars of the various ancient Indo-European languages and is used in the formation of nominals, adverbials, particles and verbs. This study will focus on the examination of a small class of verbal forma- tions, the reduplicated presents, a class that displays a number of pecu- liar features regarding both its formative details and its semantic aspect. Different types of reduplication are employed in the present system, the most common being (a) partial or symbolic reduplication, with only part of the root with a vowel copied over in the reduplicative syllable, and (b) full reduplication with a number of subtypes, best exemplified by the intensive formations of Sanskrit. Other less common types are the so- called "Attic" reduplication, in origin a subtype of (a) and more com- mon in Greek with vowel-initial roots, and the ambiguous "internal" reduplication that takes place in the interior of the word. What I intend to do in this study is to present a collection of the material attested in the different languages, systematize it according to certain criteria, with occasional comments upon some problematic phonological details as well as upon the etymological associations of some forms. 1. Generally in the Indo-European languages the present tense of a verb may be obtained by one or more of the following morphophone- mic processes: (a) ablaut of radical vowel, i.e. by qualitative or quan- titative changes of the vowel of the root, thus observing different gradations: full or normal grade, lengthened grade, and zero grade when the radical vowel is reduced to either zero or to a reduced vowel, usually -i-, (b) affixation, i.e. suffixation or infixation, (c) reduplication, and (d) suppletion. The different processes may not be historically cotemporal with one another, but in the historical period of the languages concerned they are all well documented and, to varied degrees, used by most or all of the languages. Reduplication, in par- ticular, is one of the best utilized processes in the formation of the present, the preterite and the perfect systems. Despite the large diversity in the different languages, some gen- 161 162 WORD, VOLUME 43, NUMBER 2 (AUGUST 1992) eral characteristics, peculiar to the class of the reduplicated presents as a whole in IE can be marked. First, we must distinguish between the two main types of present formations, the athematic and the thematic. The former, historically the oldest present form in IE, shows full grade of the radical vowel in the singular and dual and zero grade in the plural, and the endings are directly attached to the reduplicated stem; the accent originally was on the radical syllable but later shifted on to the reduplicative syllable. The latter, which is a more recent formation but well into the common period of PIE, is characterized by zero grade of the root, accent on the reduplicative syllable and the intervention of a thematic vowel between the reduplicated stem and the endings. In both types the reduplicative vowel is normally -i-, but other vowels too are common. This is a very general statement, with many exceptions, and in no way should it be taken as the only rule covering the entire corpus of the material. It, however, implies that this must have been the situation in the proto-language well before the split into different dialects and eventually distinct languages and as such it serves as a hint for comparativists in the effort to reconstruct the proto-paradigm or isolate the model for later creations. For an evaluation. of the devel- opment of this present class in Indo-European see section 8 along with a tabular representation of the results of this evaluation at the end. 2. Material from Greek 2.1 Reduplicated presents of the athematic type. Greek has pre- served a good number of these archaic present formations, and in some cases analogical extensions have broadened the paradigm. Such present stems are the following: J3CJ311JLL 'stride', evidenced in the participle J3LJ3ac;; Lac. J3CJ3an corresponds to Skt. j(gati 'goes'. With transfer to the thematic conju- gation we find J3LJ3w, participle J3LJ3wv, an old variant of J3LJ3ac; in Homer, and with -sk- suffix J3LJ3aO'KW. Cf. also simple present J3aCvw. *8C811JLL 'bind, tie', seen in the 3 pl. imperative 8L8Evrwv, as in Od. 12.54 ev 8t:O'JLOU7L 8L8evrwv 'let them bind in bonds'; cf. also 3 sg. imperfect 8C~; cf. Skt. unreduplicated dydti from root dii 'bind' .. 8C8wJLL 'give, offer', cf. Skt. dddiimi 'id.', Lat. unreduplicated thematic present do (but see section 5, below). In Homer we find an imperative with long vowel 8C8w8L and infinitive 8L8oiJvaL; most likely the lengthening is metrical, as in nO"tlJLEvoc;, n9"tlJLEVaL. 8Ct11JL«L 'seek out', for tTITEw 'id.', from a proto-form *8L-8_!.;(i- JLL. We have the gloss in Hesychius 8C0'8TIJLaL· t11Tw; cf. Lesb. unre- GIANNAKIS: REDUPLICATION 163 duplicated taTTJfJ.L and the noun 8Ct'T}O'Lc; 'inquiry'; by analogy to the future 8L8roaw of 8C8wfJ.L we get 8Lt'T}O'OfJ.E9a (Od. 16. 239). Homer attests the form 8Cte, with a transfer to the thematic conjugation. LT}fJ.L 'throw, cast', pl. LEfJ.Ev; Curtius (1873: 153 ff.) sees only one root for both meanings 'desire' (LEfJ.<XL, middle) and 'send, throw'. According to him, originally there was a simple root *yii- which is intransitive, and with reduplication it becomes causative, hence the meaning 'make go'>'send; throw'; cf. the parallelism between Greek and Latin WTTJfJ.L: sisto = LT}fJ.L: sero. But on the other hand we have also LT}fJ.L : i)Ka : iacio : ieci = TL91}fJ.L : £91}Ka :facio :foci. The Armenian noun himn 'basis, foundation' from IE *semTJ- also points to a root with *s-; cf. on the same line Lat. semen, OHG siimo 'seed', Lith. semens 'Flachsaat', Gk. iJtJ.a 'cast, throw'. Therefore, we must have two different roots, *ye- seen in LT}fJ.L (<*yi-yeH-mi) = Lat. iacio, and *se- (i.e. *seH-) as in LT}fJ.L (*si-seH-mi) = Lat. sero. Cf. further Frisk (1960: 714-15) and Hamp (1985: 36 ff.). WTTJfJ.L 'stand', pl. LO'TclfJ.Ev; its meaning is causative according to Curtius (1873: 154), whereas Skt. tf~thati and Av. histaiti 'id.' (with transfer to the thematic type) have intransitive meaning; cf. also Lat. sisto. KL)(P"lfJ.L 'lend', i~e. 'give or cause to use' beside xpaotJ.aL 'use'; found also in the middle KL)(P<XfJ.<XL 'borrow'. Cf. also the reduplicated future KL)(pi)aeL·8aveweL, quoted by Hesychius, like 8L8roaw, 8Lt'T}O'OfJ.E9a. ovLVT}fJ.L 'to benefit', from a root *H3neH2- (see Lejeune 1964: 94-96). This present must have been an analogical creation built on the proportion c:M"iJvaL : WTTJfJ.L = ovfJaaL : X. The -i- seems to have a morphological significance, i.e. it must be the morphological index of present tense, associated thus either with the vowel -i of the present ending -mi or with the -i- of the present reduplication in general. Wackernagel (1953: 946) connects it to Skt. nd-thd- 'help, assistance; resource'. 1TLfJ.1T).T}fJ.L 'fill'. Similar patterning is seen in 1TLfJ.1TP"lfJ.L which shows a striking structural and paradigmatic correspondence to 1TLfJ.1T>-1}fJ.L; cf. 1TLfJ.1TP"lfJ.L 'burn', 1TLfJ.1TpavaL, 1Tpi)aw, E1Tp'T}aa, 1TE1Tp'T}Ka, E1Tpi)0'91}v, 1rpi)Ow = 1TLfJ.1T).T}fJ.L, 1TLfJ.1T>.avaL, 1r>.i)aw, E1T>.T}aa, 1TE1T>-1}fJ.<XL, E1T>.i)a91}v, 1T).1)9w. Cf. also a Homeric im- perative EfJ.1TLfJ.1T).1}9L with long radical vowel. *1T£<pp'T}fJ.L, attested in the infinitive E0'1TL<ppavaL 'insert', used by Aristotle (Historia Animalium 541b 11), probably built on the model of L<rravaL and related to Gk. <p£pw and Skt. bfbharti 'carry'. 164 WORD, VOLUME 43, NUMBER 2 (AUGUST 1992) -rC01]J.LL 'put, place', pl. -rCOEJ.LEV from IE *dheH-; a widely at- tested verb in most of the Indo-European languages. TLTPTIJ.LL 'pierce', beside TLTp<iw, n-rpaCvw, TETpaCvw all redu- plicated forms, obviously with intensive meaning based on the simple -rep-/-rop- seen in the present -reCpw 'wear out, distress' and aorist -ropetv, Lat. tero 'to rub'. The form L'TTTaJ.LaL 'fly' is a later formation from '1TETOJ.LaL 'id. ', built on a model like ecr-r11v : L(JTaJ.Lat. = E'1TT1]V : X. We find forms like KLXTIJ.LEV, KLXTtT1]V, etc. which are understood as aorists to the new present KL)(<ivw, supposedly all from *KL)(1]J.LL 'come to, reach' next to simple present xatoJ.LaL 'id.'. Chantraine (1968: 536) points out that this verb is "d'aspect terminatif", and "a ete reserve a une fonction quasi aoristique". *KL)(1]J.LL presupposes a PIE *ghi-gheH-mi which gives Skt. jahiiti 'he leaves', Av. zaziiiti 'return'; cf. the Sanskrit aorist ahiit with no reduplication in contrast to Gk. KL)(f}vaL which is an innovation. 2.2 Reduplicated presents of the thematic type. The reduplicated presents with thematic vowel constitute an established class within the verbal system of Greek, characterized by certain features peculiar to this class alone: zero grade of the root and uploads/Geographie/ reduplication-as-a-morphological-marker-in-the-indo-european-languages-reduplicated-presents1.pdf