Cover not available
Part of
Operationalizing Iconicity
Edited by Pamela Perniss, Olga Fischer and Christina Ljungberg
[Iconicity in Language and Literature 17] 2020
► pp. 39–56

Iconicity of Telugu ideophones and full word reduplications

| Osmania University
| University of York
This paper offers an account of variation in iconicity within and between ideophones and Full Word Reduplications (FWRs) in Telugu texts. Some of this variation is connected to differences in the grammatical classes to which these structures belong, the types of constructions in which they participate, and the semantic functions they encode. Adverbial ideophones, occurring largely as optional elements in quotative and collocational constructions have more iconicity than interoceptive ideophones in predicate-verbal constructions. Fully reduplicated regular and verbal adverbs with an augmentation function have higher levels of iconicity than adjectival FWRs serving multiple functions including evaluative meanings associated with diminution or attenuation. Based on these observations, a tentative scale of iconicity is proposed for Telugu. This scale should be elaborated and validated in future research by making use of multimodal corpora of ideophones and all varieties of reduplicative structures.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous research
  • 3.The present study
    • 3.1Methodology: The corpus
  • 4.Iconicity of Telugu ideophones
  • 5.Iconicity of Telugu FWRs
  • 6.Summary and conclusion
  • Note
  • Acknowledgments
  • Abbreviations
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 13 May 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.17.03dug
References (25)
References
Abbi, A. 1992. Reduplication in South Asian Languages: An Areal, Typological and Historical Study. New Delhi: Allied Publishers.Google Scholar
Akita, K. 2013. “The lexical iconicity hierarchy and its grammatical correlates”. In Iconic Investigations. [Iconicity in language and literature Vol. 12] L. Ellestrom, O. Fischer and C. Ljungberg (Eds.), (PP. 331–349). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. “The linguistic integration of Japanese ideophones and its typological implications”. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 62:2, 314–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Apte, M. L. 1968. Reduplication, Echo Formation, and Onomatopoeia in Marathi. Poona: Deccan College.Google Scholar
Bhaskararao, P. 1977. Reduplication and Onomatopoeia in Telugu. Poona: Deccan College.Google Scholar
Blasi, D. E., Wichmann, S., Hammarström, H., Stadler, P. and Christiansen, M. H. 2016. “Sound meaning association biases evidences across thousands of languages”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113: 39, 10818–10823. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dilawar. 2014. konɖā kōnəllō: ādɪʋɑ̄sɪ̄lə kadʰəlu [From the Hills and Forests Groves: Tribal Tales]. Pallwancha: Samata PublicationsGoogle Scholar
Dingemanse, M., Blasi, D. E., Lupyan, G., Christiansen, M. H. and Monaghan, P. 2015. “Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language”. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 19:10, 603–615, DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dingemanse, M. and Akita, K. 2017. “An inverse relationship between expressiveness and grammatical integration: On the morphosyntactic typology of ideophones with special reference to Japanese”. Journal of Linguistics 53: 501–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duggirala, V. 2016. “On the iconicity of ideophones in Telugu”. Poster presented at the International symposium on ‘Mimetics in Japanese and other languages of the world’ held during Dec. 17–18. Tachikawa city, Japan.Google Scholar
Fischer, O. C. M. 2011. “Cognitive iconic grounding of reduplication in language”. Iconicity in Language and Literature, Vol. 10, P. Michellucci, O. C. M. Fischer and C. Ljungberg (Eds.), (PP. 55–81). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Haiman, J. 1980. “The iconicity of grammar: isomorphism and motivation”. Language 56, 515–540. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kajitani, M. 2005. “Semantic properties of reduplication among the world’s languages”. LSO working papers in Linguistics 5: Proceedings of WIGL 93–106.Google Scholar
Kouwenberg, S., and LaCharite, D. 2015. “Arbitrariness and iconicity in total reduplication: Evidence from Caribbean creoles”. Studies in Language 39:2, 971–991. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krishnamurti, Bh., and Gwynn, J. P. L. 1985. A Grammar of Modern Telugu. New Delhi: O.U.P.Google Scholar
Kwon, N. 2017. “Total reduplication in Japanese ideophones”. Glossa 2:1, 40: 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ljungberg, C. 2010. “Dynamic instances of interaction: The performative function of iconicity in literary texts”. Sign Systems Studies 38 (1/4). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mattes, V. 2014. Types of Reduplication: A Case Study of Bikol. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meir, I., Padden, C., Aronoff, M., and Sandler, W. 2013. “Competing iconicities in the structure of language”. Cognitive Linguistics 24:2, 309–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perniss, P., Thomson, R. L., and Vigliocci, G. 2010. “Iconicity as a general property of language: evidence from spoken and signed languages”. Frontiers in Psychology 1, 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rozhansky, F. I. 2015. “Two semantic patterns of reduplication: Iconicity revisited”. Studies in Language 39 (4): 992–1018. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sailaja, P. 2015. “Telugu”. In Edinburgh Handbook of Evaluative Morphology, N. Grandi and L. Kortevelyessy (eds), 321–332. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Usha Devi, A. 2001. A Dictionary of Onomatopoeic Words in Telugu. Hyderabad: P.S. Telugu University.Google Scholar
Waugh, L. R. 1994. “Degrees of iconicity in the lexicon”. Journal of pragmatics 22, 55–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Duggirala, Vasanta
2023. Metaphoric expressions and temporality in Telugu. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 10:1 ► pp. 19 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.