This article re-examines the data presented in Steriade (1982) on the reduplication in Greek and Sanskrit, trying to show that the autosegmental approach to morphology provides a framework in terms of which it is often possible to predict when to use ...
This article re-examines the data presented in Steriade (1982) on the reduplication in Greek and Sanskrit, trying to show that the autosegmental approach to morphology provides a framework in terms of which it is often possible to predict when to use the option of spreading (rather than copying) in the association of a phonemic melody and the CV slots. It is also argued in passing that Marantz's treatment of preattached phoneme in a reduplicating skeleton is wrong in light of Sanskrit intensive reduplication.