2005
DOI: 10.1017/s0952675705000527
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The binarity effect in Kosraean reduplication

Abstract: This paper offers a formal analysis of prefixing and suffixing reduplication in Kosraean. The prosodic shape of each affix is sensitive to the form of the stem, giving rise to multiple prosodic variants. In particular, its prefix illustrates the binarity effect, in which the reduplicant is binary if and only if the base is binary. Curiously, the suffix is not subject to the same generalisation, but still follows from the same formal analysis. Both affixes also show additional curious effects of vowel-initial s… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Partial reduplication is achieved by ranking general structure-penalizing constraints below input-output correspondence and above base-reduplicant correspondence, an approach adopted in Gafos 1998, Kennedy 2005, Spaelti 1997, and Yu 2005. The prosody of reduplicative substrings is achieved through aligning morpheme edges generally to elements such as syllables or feet.…”
Section: Morphological Componentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Partial reduplication is achieved by ranking general structure-penalizing constraints below input-output correspondence and above base-reduplicant correspondence, an approach adopted in Gafos 1998, Kennedy 2005, Spaelti 1997, and Yu 2005. The prosody of reduplicative substrings is achieved through aligning morpheme edges generally to elements such as syllables or feet.…”
Section: Morphological Componentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Following Spaelti (1997), Gafos (1998), Walker (1998), Ussishkin (2000), Kager (2001), Kennedy (2002Kennedy ( , 2005, McCarthy (2003) and Yu (2005), the association of the reduplicative substring to a single syllable can be done with two general constraints. First, ALIGN(m-R, s-R) (McCarthy & Prince 1993a) in (7a) effectively requires at least one syllable for the affix, while *STRUC-s (Zoll 1993) penalises each syllable in the output (7b).…”
Section: Preliminary Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…is the Emergence of the Unmarked (McCarthy & Prince 1994a): even though long vowels and codas are tolerated in Tonkawa generally ( Faith -IO≫ Markedness ), the reduplicant is allowed to copy only what it likes because it is subject to a different set of faithfulness constraints ( Markedness ≫ Faith -BR). The otherwise dominated markedness constraints against codas and long vowels will then determine the shape of the monosyllable (Walker 2000, Kennedy 2005, Yu 2005 et al . ).…”
Section: Gtt Alternativesmentioning
confidence: 99%