From: selvakum@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering)
Subject: Re: echo words
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:38:20 GMT

In article <92Aug26.124456edt.105822(3)@yoho.uwaterloo.ca>, Asokan <nasokan@yoho.uwaterloo.ca> writes:
> In article <BtLJ4M.J89@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> you (Dr Selvakumar) write:
> >   [...] The
> >   interesting thing is if a word begins with "ki" such as "kizhangu" 
> >   or "kiNaru", "kiRukkal" then the echo formation is *usually* not
> >   attempted although in cases like "kiLi" = "parrot" one can hear 
> >   kiLi-hiLi.   Another interesting observation is some expressions
> 
> Unrelated memory associations:
> 
> 	kIchchu mAchchu
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

         Is it the expression used when "tickling" children ?
         If so, "kichchu kichchu" and  "kichcu muchchu' are also used 
         but these *might* not be echo words. 

> 	mUlai kAlai (maybe only in TE)
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

          I'm sorry i don't know this. Does mUlai means a corner here ?
          Can you please give the meaning and context of this saying ?
          Thanks. [ it might also be a case of "pair-words" rather than
          echo words. ]
> 
> [...]
> >  Summary: The "ki.." formation in tamil is to show "some such thing" 
> >           if it is a noun and "do any such thing" if it is a verb
> >           and it is a characteristic of Tamil. Other dravidain languages
> >           have similar but differnt formations for the same purpose.
> 
> I don't know enough about North Indian languages to comment.
> But at least in in Indian college slang (ok, I should be
> more specific...there is no standardized Indian College Slang!
> What I say applies to Kharagpur slang) a similar device is
> employed:
> 
> 	ragging shagging (:-)
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 	lathe shathe
        ^^^^^^^^^^^
            
          The above examples are interesting. More examples from other
          indian languages ( esp. the so called Indo-Aryan languages)
          would add further insight.  

> Given that the number of Dravidians in Kharagpur is probably
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> not high enough to influence the linguistic development, I would
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> tempted to hazard the guess that (colloquial) Hindi or Bengali
> too have similar devices.

        I think the above statement is not quite correct, because it is a 
        well known fact that most indian languages ( Hindi, Bengali, Oriya
        Assamese,...and other Indo-Aryan languages) have "borrowed"
        several dravidian syntax and such structural features. [ See 
        Sunit Kumar Chatterji, The Origin and Development of the
        Bengali language,  George Allen & Unwin Ltd 1970 , appendix B 
        - for example] . I honestly don't believe that these structural
        aspects are borrowed "from dravidian" and I believe that these 
        structural features are common for almost the whole set of indian
        languages. The fact that the north indian languages have taken
        very significant influences of "aryan" ( read indo-european 
        language influences) tongues make them look different from Tamil/
        Dravidian languages [ I'm not talking of vocaulary which is 
        a different issue]. It's because of this closeness of syntax and
        structural features ( plus several subtle nuances that are possible
        due to these structural features) between Tamil
        and almost all the rest of the Indian languages, it is quite
        possible to translate the literature from one language to another
        with a very degree of accuracy ( both in meaning and nuances).
        
> 
> You mention TPM's assertion that the tag implies a derogatory
> connotation.  IMHO, it is more accurate to say that the use
> of the tag is meant to take away some of the specificity of
> the original word.  One would do this in two cases:
> 
> a) Wildcarding: There is some ambiguity in the context and the
>    first word provides too much specificity that must be diluted:
> 
> 	e.g: mAdu kIdu vandhitap pOkudhu.
>         (it may be an Adu instead!)
> 		
> b) Sarcasm: The speaker wants to intentionally play down the
>    specifity, and hence the import or value, of the object/action
>    denoted by the first word:
> 
> 	e.g: ennavO pattam kittam kidaiththadhAm.
> 
> The latter is actually an instance of the former.
> 
> This is probably not a complete observation and by no means a
> scholarly one.(I cannot cite a scholarly paper kIppar to support
> this observation :-)
     
         I entirely agree with you on the above two observations 
         (wildcarding and sarcasm). The main import is to indicate
         a class of things or actions and to "dilute the specificity"
         as you aptly mean by these echo words. I think sarcasm might
         be a secondary effect in some situations. [ it appears that the
         "O" in ennavO and the "aam" ending of kidaiththadhaam, implying
         a secondary source of this observation lends a sarcasm rather
         than the use of the word "kittam" ]  

> 
> Regards,
> 
> - Asokan
> 
> ---
> Asokan(nasokan@uwaterloo.ca)|   /\"\  |  /""\  |""|"" |""|" |""|""      \"/
> ICR/MFCF/CS, U. of Waterloo |   \/  | | |  --  |  |   |  |  |  |    /""""/"\""|
> 519 885 1211 x5084(W)       | |""""/""| |  --  /""|"" |  | / ""|"\ |  \ |   | |
> 519 725 5485      (H)       |  \_ /   |  \__/  \_/    |  | \_ / _/  \_/  \_/  |



        anbudan
        Selva Selvakumar