Category talk:Reduplication

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Latest comment: 14 years ago by KYPark in topic chick flick etc
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Until Revision as of 10:02, 25 June 2009
This etymology is incomplete. You can help Wiktionary by elaborating on the origins of this term.
Revision as of 11:09, 25 June 2009
Probably a frequentive imitative of rhythmic back-and-forth motion, such as teeter-totter, tic-tac, wigwag, whim-wham, flim-flam, etc., under the umbrella term of reduplication; also likely influenced by the verbs see and saw of either present or past tense.
Revision as of 05:01, 26 June 2009
Probably a frequentative imitative of rhythmic back-and-forth, up-and-down or zigzaging motion, such as teeter-totter, zigzag, flip-flop, ping-pong, etc., under the umbrella term of reduplication; also likely influenced by the verbs see and saw of either present or past tense.
Note: It remains the same as of now.
Revision as of 05:58, 26 June 2009
Assigned seesaw to the newly created Category:Reduplication. --nemo 06:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

chick flick etc[edit]

See: User talk:KYPark#reduplication --nemo 06:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Proto-Indo-European word *kʷékʷlos = "wheel" (Greek κύκλος (kúklos), kyklos = "circle") also has reduplication, likely for onomatopoeia.

Linguistic mimesis and reduplication are so universal that Greek kyklos could be compared with Korean vi. 구르다 (gureuda), vt. 굴리다 (gullida), and Japanese phrase ころころ ころがる くるま (korokoro korogaru kuruma), meaning "round and round / rolling / wheel, cart, or car," respectively.

English and French cycle and German Zyklus equal to, and stem (via Latin cyclus) from, Greek reduplication kyklos whose sound has more or less varied from tongue to tongue, as well as from dialect to dialect, often to such an extent that some variations no more sound like a reduplication in the phonologic but perhaps morphologic sense, eg, cycle than Zyklus. Is one or both of these examples a reduplication? From the origination perspective, I would say both are! What else would any of you say? --nemo 04:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)