Re: Duplication or reduplication?
From: Miguel Carrasquer (mcv_at_wxs.nl)
Date: 06/29/04
- Next message: Sean O'Leathlobhair: "Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)"
- Previous message: M. Ranjit Mathews: "Re: Lost in the mists of time..."
- In reply to: Kangxi: "Duplication or reduplication?"
- Next in thread: Rolleston: "Re: Duplication or reduplication?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 18:28:47 +0200
On 29 Jun 2004 04:17:43 -0700, kangxi@volcanomail.com
(Kangxi) wrote:
>Hi,
>I have a question for you linguists.
>I'm trying to learn Mandarin and I'm currently looking at the use it
>makes of reduplication and it's got me curious about the term
>reduplication.
>I assume linguists of all people would be extra careful when choosing
>their technical jargon, so I assume you deliberately chose
>"reduplication" in preference to "duplication". (And from what I can
>see "duplication" is not even a technical term.) Yet none of the
>definitions I have read adequately explain (to me) why you didn't
>choose "duplication" as the label for the phenomenon.
Reduplicatio is the Latin translation of Greek anadiplôsis.
It couldn't be translated as duplicatio, because Greek
diplôsis already had a technical meaning, namely
"compounding" (e.g. kuano-khrous "dark-coloured": Aristotle,
Rhetorica, 1406a6). Epanadiplôsis (conduplicatio) is the
repetition of a whole word.
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@wxs.nl
- Next message: Sean O'Leathlobhair: "Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)"
- Previous message: M. Ranjit Mathews: "Re: Lost in the mists of time..."
- In reply to: Kangxi: "Duplication or reduplication?"
- Next in thread: Rolleston: "Re: Duplication or reduplication?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
