Expressive values of reduplication in Barunga Kriol (northern Australia)

Abstract

This article describes the semantic values of reduplication in Barunga Kriol – an English-based creole of northern Australia –, with a focus on its expressive functions. Barunga Kriol reduplication has two types of functions. Its most frequent meaning is aspectual atelicity. In addition, it has a number of expressive meanings and connotations: hypocoristic usages; descriptions of children’s games and imitations; and a softening role in imperatives and reprimands. Contrary to the aspectual value of reduplication which is iconically motivated, expressive values are motivated by the pragmatic association of reduplication with children.Expressive uses of reduplication in Borunge are rarer and less regular than the grammaticalized aspectual uses, which are very frequent. Aspectual reduplication is optional most of the time, so that explaining its actual distribution in discourse is a complicated matter. This article shows that this distribution can often be explained in the view of the expressive values of reduplication (some of them also conveyed by affixal evaluative morphology in the Australian languages that have been replaced by this creole). Thus, taking into account the expressive dimension of reduplication contributes significantly to the linguistic analysis of the grammaticalized aspectual function of reduplication.

Truncation, affection, and pain in Southern Bantu

“…Other examples of simultaneous meaning are slurs like Kraut, a derogatory Anglophone term for Germans, which simultaneously conveys that a referent is German (descriptive) and that the speaker does not like Germans (expressive) (Gutzmann 2013). Despite occasional overlap with descriptive meaning, perhaps the most important aspect of expressives is that they are generally syntactically and semantically optional, meaning that sentences with and without them are both acceptable in traditional grammaticality judgments (Kratzer 1999;Fortin 2011: 68;Ponsonnet 2018), 1 and do not add descriptive meaning but rather flesh out perspectives in the context of the utterance (Flier 1975: 2;Beard 1995).…”