A Focus Account for Contrastive Reduplication: Prototypicality and Contrastivity

A Focus Account for Contrastive Reduplication: Prototypicality and Contrastivity∗ Binna Lee, Chungmin Lee Seoul National University, 599 Kwanangno, Kwanak-gu Seoul, 51-742, Korea bin4you8@snu.ac.kr, clee@snu.ac.kr Abstract. This paper sets forth the phenomenon of Contrastive Reduplication (CR) in English relevant to the notion of contrastive focus (CF). CF differs from other reduplicative patterns in that rather than the general intensive function, denotation of a more prototypical and default meaning of a lexical item appears from the reduplicated form resulting as a semantic contrast with the meaning of the non-reduplicated word. Thus, CR is in concordance with CF under the concept of contrastivity. However, much of the previous works on CF associated contrastivity with a manufacture of a set of alternatives taking a semantic approach. We claim that a recent discourse- pragmatic account takes advantage of explaining the vague contrast in informativeness of CR. Zimmermann's (2006) Contrastive Focus Hypothesis characterizes contrastivity in the sense of speaker's assumptions about the hearer's expectation of the focused element. This approach makes possible adaptation to CR and recovers the possible subsets of meaning of a reduplicated form in a more refined way showing contrastivity in informativeness. Additionally, CR in other languages along with similar set-limiting phenomenon in various languages will be introduced in general. Keywords: Contrastive Reduplication, Contrastive Focus, contrastivity, pragmatic 1. Introduction This paper examines the linguistic phenomenon of what is called Contrastive Reduplication (henceforth CR) (Ghoemshi et al. 2004) in English. In many works on reduplication patterns, CR has been unfairly regarded as a subclass of mere repetition or lexical duplications that simply function as an intensifier. However, CR is understood to have distinguishable uniqueness apart from the family of reduplication forms shown in various languages which are intensively studied in phonological and morphological aspects. Interestingly, the semantic properties of CR allows itself to be more exposed to our everyday, mundane conversation than to written discourse. CR is not merely a repetition or duplicated form of a lexical element for the purpose of intensive use. Consider the examples of CR given in (1).1 (1) a. I'll make the tuna salad, and you make the SALAD-salad. b. Oh, we're not LIVING-TOGETHER-living-together. c. My car isn't MINE-mine; it's my parents'. d. I had a JOB-job once. [a 'real' 9-to-5 office job, as opposed to an academic job] ∗ Copyright 2007 by Binna Lee, Chungmin Lee 1 More examples of CR in English discussed by Ghomeshi et al. (2004) can be found in the website http://www.umanitoba.ca/linguistics/russell/redup-corpus.html 259 e. Are you LEAVING-leaving? (from Ghomeshi et al., 2004) As illustrated in the examples of (1), the reduplicated form SALAD-salad has the semantic function of elucidating possible interpretation of a word that is associated with the term in a context. So in (1a), the CR denotes plain, normal salad as opposed to other specific salads (e.g. chicken salad, shrimp salad, etc.) overall and (1b) is understood as living together as roommates (which is the general interpretation of living-together) not lovers. Besides the prototypical effect, additional CR semantic properties are that CR …

Content truncated to 500 words