<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="A00-2039">
  <Title>Finite-State Reduplication in One-Level Prosodic Morphology</Title>
  <Section position="4" start_page="0" end_page="296" type="intro">
    <SectionTitle>
2 Reduplication
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> A well-known case from the context-sensitivity debate of the eighties is the N-o-N reduplicative construction from Bambara (Northwestern Mande, (Culy, 1985)):  (1) a. wulu-o-wulu 'whichever dog' b. wulunyinina-o-wulunyinina 'whichever dog searcher' c. wulunyininafil~la-o-wulunyininafil~la  'whoever watches dog searchers' Beyond total copying, (1) also illustrates the possibility of so-called fixed-melody parts in redupli- null cation: a constant/o/intervenes between base (i.e. original) and reduplicant (i.e. copied part, in bold print), t The next case from Semai expressive minor reduplication (Mon-Khmer, Hendricks (1998)) highlights the possibility of an interaction between reduplication and internal truncation: (2) a. c?e:t ct-c?e:t 'sweet' b. drph dh-drj3h 'appearance of nodding constantly' c. cfa:l cl-cfa:l 'appearance of flickering red object' Reduplication copies the initial and final segment of the base, skipping all of its interior segments, which may be of arbitrary length.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> A final case comes from Koasati punctual-aspect reduplication (Muscogean, (Kimball, 1988)):  (3) a. ta.hfis.pin tlahas-tl 6:-pin 'to be light in weight' b. la.pfit.kin llapat-ll6:-kin 'to be narrow c. ak.Mt.lin alk-hl o-l~itlin 'to be loose' d. ok.cAk.kon Olk-hlo-c~kon  'to be green or blue' Koasati is particularly interesting, because it shows that copy and original need not always be adjacent - here the reduplicant is infixed into its own base and also because it illustrates that the copy may be phonologically modified: the/h/in the copied part of (3).c,d is best analysed as a voiceless vowel, i.e. the phonetically closest consonantal expression of its source. Moreover, the locus of the infixed reduplicant is predictable on prosodic grounds, as it is inserted after the first heavy syllable of the base. Heavy syllables in Koasati are long (C)VV or closed (C)VC. Prosodic influence is also responsible for the length alternation of its fixed-melody part/o(o)/, since the heaviness requirement for the penultimate, stressed, syllable of the word causes long \[o:\] iff the reduplicant constitutes that syllable.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> tCuly (1985), who presents a superset of the data under (1) in the context of a formal proof of context-sensitivity, shows that the reduplicative construction in fact can copy the outcome of a recursive agentive construction, thereby becoming truly unbounded. He emphasizes the fact that it is &amp;quot;very productive, with few, if any restrictions on the choice of the noun&amp;quot; (p.346).</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>