THE FORMATION OF WORDS. 21 
deavour to classify the varieties of the meanings designated by 
simple reduplications. 
1. Specialization and differentiation. 
I believe that I place myself in opposition to every gram- 
marian, who has written on Malay, by denying that redupli- 
cation is one of the modes of expressing the plural. I will not 
make any superfluous quotations, but in half a dozen grammars 
which lie before me, I find it stated that this is one of the plu- 
ral formations, though in almost every case, the said gram- 
marians find it impossible to state why the word should be re- 
duplicated, as already the single word implies the plural, and why 
even the reduplication should be joined together with the ad- 
jective Ss segala which is universally accepted as indicating 
the plural. A few careful grammarians have noted the fact 
that only few words can form plurals by means of a reduplica- 
tion. ‘This observation should have led them to a correct 
understanding of the meaning of such alleged plurals. The 
universal paradigma of this “ plural” in grammars is rel yy Oe 
raja. It is well known that a 'y raja alone can mean ‘“ kings ;” 
now if raja-raja should be used to avoid ambiguity, or to dis- 
tinguish it from a possible singular “king,” why should in al- 
most every case oS seyala be added : rel) is segala raja- 
raja, where the translation ‘all the kings” or “all kings” is 
quite out of the question ? 
In accordance with other Malayan languages, including 
the Malagasy, I explain the reduplication as intended to special- 
ize the sense of the word. A careful study of Malay liter- 
ature, aside of any other language, might have led to a correct: 
understanding of the expression. Take for example the ever- 
recurring phrase in Malay court novels: 
MS silyr, gapilde ame glo Tel, JM aly) doles 
R. A. Soc., No. 39, 1903. 
