Chapter published in:
Extravagant Morphology: Studies in rule-bending, pattern-extending and theory-challenging morphology
Edited by Matthias Eitelmann and Dagmar Haumann
[Studies in Language Companion Series 223] 2022
► pp. 181–206

do not repeat

Repetition and reduplication in German revisited

| Goethe-University Frankfurt | Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics
This chapter offers a synopsis of repetitive and reduplicative constructions in German, a set of diverse morphophonological types mostly found in substandard registers of the language. A phonological examination of these structures suggests that German strictly prohibits exact adjacent repetition of phonological material within lexical representations. I suggest this generalisation to be a grammatical requirement in the lexicon that holds across all levels of the phonological hierarchy, with only a few well-defined exceptions (abbreviations, loans, onomatopoeias, and ideophones). Reduplicative constructions are situated between the poles of marginal, sub-standard language use, apparent deviance from the concatenative ideal that otherwise pervades German morphology, and strict adherence to the lexical-phonological requirement regarding identity avoidance. In this respect, they are, as I argue, characteristic instances of extravagant morphology.
Keywords: reduplication, repetition, German
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Repetition in language
    • 1.2Extravagant repetition in German
    • 1.3 do not repeat : A generalisation regarding reduplicative structures
  • 2.Repetition and repetition avoidance at the sub-lexical level
    • 2.1The segmental level
    • 2.2The syllable level
      • 2.2.1Syllable repetition in the non-native stratum
  • 3.Repetition at the lexical level and above
    • 3.1The foot level
      • 3.1.1Exceptions to (1)
    • 3.2Repetition at the p-word level
      • 3.2.1“Self-compounding”
      • 3.2.2Identical constituent compounds (ICC)
      • 3.2.3Unbounded repetition
    • 3.3Repetition at the phrase level
  • 4.Summary and conclusion
    • 4.1Summary
    • 4.2Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 16 March 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.223.08ken
References
Barz, Irmhild
2015 German. In Word-formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe [Vol. 4, Word formation in the individual European languages], Susan Olsen, Peter Müller, Ingeborg Ohnheiser & Franz Rainer (eds), 2387–2410. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Berent, Iris & Shimron, Joseph
2003 Co-occurrence restrictions on identical consonants in the Hebrew lexicon: are they due to similarity? Journal of Linguistics 39(1): 31–55. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brugmann, Karl
1917 Gleichklangvermeidung in der lautgesetzlichen Entwicklung und in der Wortbildung. Indogermanische Forschungen 38: 117–128.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, Marc, Speybroeck, Sara & Vanderelst, Dieter
2009 Is there room for the BBC in the mental lexicon? On the recognition of acronyms. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 62(9): 1832–1842. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bzdęga, Andrzej
1965 Reduplizierte Wortbildung im Deutschen. Poznan: Poznanskie Towarzystwo Przyjaciól Nauk.Google Scholar
Domahs, Ulrike, Wiese, Richard, Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina & Schlesewsky, Matthias
2008 The processing of German word stress: evidence for the prosodic hierarchy. Phonology 25(1): 1–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drake, Derek
2013 Variation and Change in Northern Bavarian Quantity. PhD dissertation, The University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Dressler, Wolfgang U.
2000 Extragrammatical vs. marginal morphology. In Extragrammatical and Marginal Morphology, Ursula Doleschal & Anna M. Thornton (eds), 1–10. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, Peter
1991 Syllabische Struktur und Wortakzent. Prinzipien der Prosodik deutscher Wörter. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 10(1): 37–64. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fanselow, Gisbert & Féry, Caroline
2002 Ineffability in grammar. In Resolving Conflicts in Grammars: Optimality Theory in Syntax, Morphology, and Phonology, Gisbert Fanselow & Caroline Féry (eds), 265–307. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
Finkbeiner, Rita
2012 Naja, normal und normal. Zur Syntax, Semantik und Pragmatik der x-und-x-Konstruktion im Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 31(1): 1–42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014 Identical constituent compounds in German. Word Structure 7(2): 182–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fleischer, Jürg & Schmid, Stephan
2006 Zurich German. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 36(2): 243–253. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Freywald, Ulrike
2015 Total reduplication as a productive process in German. Studies in Language 39(4): 905–945. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ghomeshi, Jila, Jackendoff, Ray, Rosen, Nicole & Russell, Kevin
2004 Contrastive focus reduplication in English (The salad-salad paper). Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 22(2): 307–357. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Golston, Chris & Wiese, Richard
1998 The structure of the German root. In Phonology and morphology of the Germanic Languages, Wolfgang Kehrein & Richard Wiese (eds), 165–185. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Görner, Rüdiger
2015 Ästhetik der Wiederholung: Versuch über ein Literarisches Formprinzip. Göttingen: Wallstein.Google Scholar
Günther, Hartmut
1981 N+N: Untersuchungen zur Produktivität eines deutschen Wortbildungstyps. In Wortbildung, Leonhard Lipka & Hartmut Günther (eds), 258–280. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Hohenhaus, Peter
2004 Identical constituent compounding–a corpus-based study. Folia Linguistica 38(3–4): 297–331. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence
1993 Economy and redundancy in a dualistic model of natural language. In SKY 1993. Yearbook of the Linguistics Association of Finland, Susanna Shore & Maria Vilkuna (eds), 33–72. Helsinki: Suomen kielitieteellinen yhdistys.Google Scholar
2018 The lexical clone: Pragmatics, prototypes, productivity. In Exact Repetition in Grammar and Discourse, Rita Finkbeiner & Ulrike Freywald (eds), 233–264. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray
2008 ‘Construction after Construction’ and its theoretical challenges. Language 84(1): 8–28. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
1960 Closing statement: Linguistics and poetics. In Style in Language, Thomas Sebeok (ed), 350–377. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kanwisher, Nancy G.
1987 Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation. Cognition 27(2): 117–143. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kentner, Gerrit
2017 On the emergence of reduplication in German morphophonology. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 36(2): 233–277. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kloeke, Wus van Lessen
1982 Deutsche Phonologie und Morphologie: Merkmale und Markiertheit, Vol. 117. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Knaus, Johannes & Domahs, Ulrike
2009 Experimental evidence for optimal and minimal metrical structure of German word prosody. Lingua 119(10): 1396–1413. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kotzor, Sandra, Molineaux, Benjamin J., Banks, Elanor & Lahiri, Aditi
2016 “Fake” gemination in suffixed words and compounds in English and German. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 140(1): 356–367. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kraehenmann, Astrid
2001 Swiss German stops: geminates all over the word. Phonology 18(1): 109–145. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mattiello, Elisa
2013 Extra-Grammatical Morphology in English: Abbreviations, Blends, Reduplicatives, and Related Phenomena. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J.
1986 OCP effects: Gemination and antigemination. Linguistic Inquiry 17(2): 207–263.Google Scholar
Müller, Gereon
1997 Beschränkungen für Binomialbildung im Deutschen: Ein Beitrag zur Interaktion von Phraseologie und Grammatik. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 16(2): 5–51. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016 Predicate doubling by phonological copying. In Linguistische Arbeitsberichte 93, Katja Barnickel, Matías Guzmán Naranjo, Johannes Hein, Sampson Korsah, Andrew Murphy, Ludger Paschen, Zorica Puškar & Joanna Zaleska (eds), 127–148. Leipzig: Universität Leipzig.Google Scholar
Paschen, Ludger
2018 The Interaction of Reduplication and Segmental Mutation: A Phonological Account. Doctoral dissertation, Universität Leipzig.Google Scholar
Pozdniakov, Konstantin & Segerer, Guillaume
2007 Similar place avoidance: A statistical universal. Linguistic Typology 11(2): 307–348. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ridouane, Rachid
2010 Geminates at the junction of phonetics and phonology. Laboratory Phonology 10: 61–90.Google Scholar
Saba Kirchner, Jesse
2010 Minimal Reduplication. PhD dissertation, University of California Santa Cruz.
Schein, Barry & Steriade, Donca
1986 On geminates. Linguistic Inquiry 17(4): 691–744.Google Scholar
Schindler, Wolfgang
1991 Reduplizierende Wortbildung im Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 44(5): 597–613. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stolz, Thomas, Stroh, Cornelia & Urdze, Aina
2011 Total Reduplication: The Areal Linguistics of a Potential Universal. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Keiichiro
1998 A Typological Investigation of Dissimilation. PhD dissertation, University of Arizona.
Walter, Mary Ann
2007 Repetition Avoidance in Human Language. PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Wiese, Richard
1990 Über die Interaktion von Morphologie und Phonologie – Reduplikation im Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 43: 603–624. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yip, Moira
1988 The obligatory contour principle and phonological rules: A loss of identity. Linguistic Inquiry 19(1): 65–100.Google Scholar
Yu, Alan
2005 Toward a typology of compensatory reduplication. In: Proceedings of the 24th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. 397–405.Google Scholar