Page:An introduction to Indonesian linguistics, being four essays.djvu/57

the word might be explained in three ways. First, it might be a partial reduplication. Secondly, it might be the final result of an originally complete doubling: Original IN kiskis would have to become kikis in Mal., for Mal. no longer admits the combination s + k. Thirdly, it is conceivable that ki- may not be a reduplication at all, but one of the formatives (like those given in § 87), as it is in Mal. kipas, “ fan ”, as compared with Toba alpas, “ to wag ”, and Karo gurpas, “ to shake the wings ”. — Precisely the same possibilities, for similar reasons, hold good in the case of the Day. lalak, “ to strip bare of leaves ”.

β. There are, however, means of determining whether it is a case of reduplication or of a formative. As an Original IN laklak has been established in § 74, it is surely simplest to regard Day. lalak as a product of this laklak ; and further, since a word kiskis occurs in many IN languages, we shall assert that this reduplication also accounts for the first syllable of Mal. kikis.

γ. Mad. possesses many striking cases of forms transitional between full and partial reduplication, as the following table shows:

Mad.	Mad. second form	Modern Jav.
sĕpsĕp	sĕssĕp	sĕsĕp, “ to suck out ”.
tĕptĕp	tĕttĕp	tĕtĕp, “ firm ”.
sĕksĕk	sĕssĕk	sĕsĕk, “ narrow ”

δ. The writer has, however, no means at hand of deciding the question whether every case of partial reduplication of the root in IN languages has proceeded from an Original IN complete reduplication or whether partial reduplication existed in Original IN side by side with the complete form.^[1]

77.   The question now presents itself, whether reduplication of the root entails a definite modification of meaning. Now we actually do observe that an intensification of the idea of the root can be expressed by reduplication, as is shown by the following table of Karo words:

1. [See also Essay II, §§ 57-9, and Essay IV, §§ 195-6, 198.]