A TYPOLOGY of ABLAUT IN PARTIAL REDUPLICATIVE INTENSIVE VERB FORMS OF THE BOUKIDAREN AYT WARYAGHEL TARIFIT DIALECT: APPLYING CORRESPONDENCE THEORY

Prepared by the researche : Karim Boudchar  – Directorate of Curricula, Ministry of National Education, Preschool Education, and Sports- Rabat.

DAC Democratic Arabic Center GmbH

International Journal of Amazigh Studies : Fourth issue – September 2025

A Periodical International Journal published by the “Democratic Arab Center” Germany – Berlin

:To download the pdf version of the research papers, please visit the following link

https://democraticac.de/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AC%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B2%D9%8A%D8%BA%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%AF%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A8%D8%B9-%D8%A3%D9%8A%D9%84%D9%88%D9%84-%E2%80%93-%D8%B3%D8%A8%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%B1-2025.pdf

1. Introduction

Research on reduplication in Berber languages remains relatively underdeveloped compared to studies on other language families. One of the earliest substantial contributions to this area came from Mohamed Lahrouchi (2004), who investigated reduplication in Taqjmit, a secret language embedded within Tachelhit Berber. Lahrouchi demonstrated that reduplication operates according to a constructed CV-shaped template—or gabarit—which governs both morphological transformations and vowel alternations. Importantly, this template functions not merely as a phonological mechanism but also serves to obscure lexical items, thereby positioning reduplication as a complex morphological process.

In 2012, Said Bouzidi expanded the scope of Berber reduplication studies by examining adverbial reduplication, arguing that it intensifies adverbial meaning and plays a critical role in syntactic and semantic modification. His analysis enriched the understanding of reduplication’s functional load in Berber syntax, illustrating its capacity to modify and reinforce linguistic expressions. Subsequently, Bouzidi and others (2015) investigated reduplication in Kabyle and Rif Berber, with a focus on its aspectual functions. Their inquiry addressed whether phonetic or morphological repetition reflects real-world action repetition or operates solely within the linguistic system. This work deepened our understanding of reduplication as a device for expressing aspectual nuances such as intensity and plurality.

More recent contributions have continued to broaden the theoretical landscape. Nataša Knežević and Amazigh Bedar (2024), for instance, examined numeral reduplication in Taqbaylit, demonstrating its systematic function in conveying event plurality and thus highlighting its semantic and syntactic versatility. Concurrently, Younas Loukili (2024) explored reduplication in Tarifit Berber through the lenses of Correspondence Theory and Generalized Alignment. His work on partial and total reduplication emphasized the role of alignment constraints in the organization of reduplicative patterns. Collectively, these studies underscore the typological diversity and functional dynamism of reduplication across Berber dialects, offering valuable insights into the structural and evolutionary trajectories of the language family.

This paper aims to contribute to the ongoing debate surrounding the Ablaut of partial reduplicative intensive verb forms in the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel dialect of Tarifit Amazigh. One of the central claims advanced herein is that the alternation of a prefinal vowel in partially reduplicated intensive verb forms—such as ittferfir ‘is fluttering’—cannot be fully explained as the result of vowel insertion accompanying tt-prefixation. While Karim Bensoukas (2012) suggests that tt- prefixation is typically accompanied by vowel epenthesis, this study explores the dynamic interaction between these processes in shaping intensive verb morphology[1]. For example, the occurrence of the vowel /i/ in forms like frfr/ttferfir ‘to flutter’ illustrates this interplay. From a different perspective, this paper hypothesizes that the prefinal vowel in forms such as ittfrfir in the Ayt Waryaghel dialect is not the product of two independent insertions, but rather results from vowel change induced by the simultaneous pressures of partial reduplication and tt-prefixation. This pattern contrasts with that observed in the past or preterite forms—e.g., ifferfer ‘fluttered’ and ibbeqbeq ‘bubbled’—where no such vowel alternation occurs.

Furthermore, vowel insertion in other Amazigh varieties—evident in forms like xdm/txdam—is argued to function primarily as a morphologically driven process, independently triggered by tt-prefixation. This study provides a detailed analysis to refine existing accounts of vowel alternation, challenging the notion that it is purely phonological. Rather, it demonstrates that such vowel changes are not autonomous but are strictly governed by morphological constraints, particularly those associated with tt-prefixation in reduplicative constructions.

This paper shifts the focus to a specific dimension of the phenomenon: the partial reduplication patterns underlying intensive verb forms in Boukidaren Tarifit. By analyzing these forms within the framework of Correspondence Theory (McCarthy and Prince 1995), the study demonstrates that partially reduplicated verbs in the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel Tarifit dialect (BAWTD) express semantic properties such as intensity, repetition, and onomatopoeic nuance. It further observes that not all base forms are actively used in the dialect, nor do they always have identifiable glosses (e.g., wš ‘[no gloss]’ → ttwešiwš ‘to susurrate’). Importantly, this research does not advocate for a model of radical reduplication; instead, it emphasizes the nuanced and functionally driven role of partial reduplication in shaping both the semantics and the morphology of intensive verb forms in BAWTD.

Accordingly, this paper sets out to explore the typology of ablaut in partially reduplicative intensive verb forms in the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel Tarifit dialect, a variety of Berber. The discussion proceeds as follows: first, the phonological and morphological framework of reduplication in Berber languages is outlined, with particular attention to key theoretical and descriptive contributions. Second, the analysis turns to the theoretical foundations of reduplication, focusing on Correspondence Theory (McCarthy and Prince 1995) and its relevance for understanding vowel alternation in partial reduplication. Third, an overview of the phonemic system of Boukidaren Tarifit is provided, including its consonant and vowel inventories and the role of epenthetic vowels in syllable structure. The core of the paper offers a detailed examination of reduplication data, particularly patterns of vowel alternation (e.g., /e/ → /i/) and their morphological functions such as marking intensification or aspectual distinctions. The paper concludes with a discussion of the broader implications of these findings for the study of reduplication in Boukidaren Tarifit Berber. Through this structured approach, the study aims to illuminate the complex interplay between phonology and morphology in reduplicative processes, particularly as they manifest in the context of Tarifit Berber.

2. Overview

Reduplication has long been a central topic of debate in linguistic theory, particularly since the advent of the Generative framework. Early studies predominantly approached reduplication as a phonological phenomenon, often neglecting its functional properties. During this period, morphology was not regarded as an independent linguistic module but was instead subsumed within the lexicon or syntax. As a result, morpho-phonological processes, including reduplication, were frequently analyzed through a purely phonological lens. However, significant contributions by scholars such as Wilbur (1973), Kiparsky (1986), have fundamentally reshaped this perspective, redefining reduplication as a key component of morphological typology and treating it as a distinct morphological construction in its own right. From a morphological standpoint, the theoretical status of reduplication remains a subject of ongoing debate. Some researchers classify it as a form of affixation, while others view it as a type of compounding .A widely influential perspective, advanced by Marantz (1982) and further developed by McCarthy and Prince (1986), argues that reduplication—whether total or partial—involves the attachment of a phonologically minimal morpheme. In contrast, an alternative perspective conceptualizes reduplication as the morphological duplication of a sub-constituent within a single word, often accompanied by phonological truncation, as seen in cases of partial reduplication.

3. Background
   • Reduplication

Reduplication is a systematic morphological operation that centers on the notion of identity, involving the repetition of a portion of the base—such as a phoneme, morpheme, or lexeme—within a single word. As a word-formation process, reduplication entails the repetition of a segment, syllable, or morpheme from the base, either to the left, right, or within the word itself. According to Wiltshire and Marantz (2000:557-558), reduplication is a process “in which the phonological form of an affix is determined in whole or in part by the phonological form of the base to which it attaches” and which carries “some inflectional or derivational meaning. Unlike repetition, which operates at the syntactic or discourse level across words, reduplication occurs within a single word, distinguishing it as a distinct morphological process (Gill, 2005). Reduplication can target the entire word, the root, or any stem-sized subconstituent, and it can even extend to non-lexical bases, such as individual affixes, or supralexical bases, such as phrases. This versatility makes reduplication a powerful mechanism for encoding grammatical and semantic distinctions, such as plurality, intensification, aspectual marking, or derivation of new lexical items.

As is clear, reduplication is a systematic morphological process that involves the repetition of phonological material—such as a segment, syllable, or morpheme—within a word to convey semantic or grammatical meaning. As defined by Carl Rubino (2005), reduplication can be categorized into two primary types: total reduplication, where the entire base is repeated and partial reduplication, where only a portion of the base is duplicated (Rubino 2005: 11). Total reduplication, such as  haw-haw, wan-wan, tay-tay , ḇisḇis in Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel Tarifiyt Berber, often serve to mark echoic expression[2], while partial reduplication involves the repetition of a segment, syllable, or subconstituent of the base (Inkelas and Zoll 2005: 123). Edith Moravcsik (1978) further elaborates on the functional diversity of reduplication, noting that it can serve various grammatical roles, such as marking plurality, intensity, aspectual distinctions, or deriving new lexical items (Moravcsik 1978: 297). She emphasizes that partial reduplication, in particular, is frequently used to mark grammatical distinctions like progressive aspect or diminutives, often involving phonological modifications to conform to the language’s constraints, such as syllable structure or stress patterns (Moravcsik 1978: 305, 310). These studies highlight the typological richness of reduplication, demonstrating its widespread occurrence across languages and its ability to encode meaning through systematic repetition.

• Theoretical assumption

In this section, we make clear our theoretical assumptions about Ablaut of Partial Reduplicative intensive verb forms of the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel Tarifit Dialect in the light of the Correspondence Theory (McCarthy and Prince, 1995). The Correspondence Theory provides a robust theoretical framework for analyzing reduplicative processes, including those found in the Boukidaren Tarifiyt Berber. This theory posits that reduplication involves a relationship of correspondence between the base and the reduplicant, governed by a set of constraints that ensure faithfulness to the base while allowing for phonological modifications. Central to this framework are the family constraints—Max, Dep, Ident(f)—as well as alignment, contiguity, anchoring, and uniformity, all of which are pivotal in analyzing reduplication. These constraints interact with markedness constraints, such as ONSET and *COMPLEX, which regulate syllable structure and phonological well-formedness. In Boukidaren Tarifiyt Berber, this interplay is evident in partial reduplication, where the reduplicant often undergoes phonological modifications, such as vowel alternation (e.g., [e] →[i]) or epenthesis (e.g., insertion of e to break consonant clusters), to adhere to the language’s phonological rules. Correspondence Theory thus offers a systematic way to account for the balance between faithfulness to the base and adherence to phonological constraints in reduplicative forms.

In the context of Boukidaren Tarifiyt Berber, Correspondence Theory is particularly useful for explaining the patterns of partial reduplication, which involves the repetition of a segment, syllable, or subset of the base, often accompanied by phonological modifications. For example, in forms like ‘ttšeṛšiṛ ‘to gush’ (from šṛ), the reduplicant exhibits vowel alternation and epenthesis, reflecting the influence of constraints like the Max- Dep- Ident constraints family, and the markedness constraints family. The theory also accounts for the alignment of reduplicative edges through constraints like anchoring/alignment, which ensures that the reduplicant is properly positioned relative to the base. Less usefully, the interaction of linearity and contiguity constraints ensures that the reduplicant maintains the sequential and structural integrity of the base. These constraints collectively explain why Boukidaren Tarifiyt Berber reduplicative forms often involve partial copying with phonological adjustments triggered by morphological ‘tt-intensity’, rather than exact replication. By applying Correspondence Theory to Boukidaren Tarifiyt Berber, we gain a deeper understanding of how reduplicative processes are shaped by the interplay of faithfulness and markedness constraints, highlighting the dialect’s reliance on reduplication as a key morphological strategy for encoding grammatical and semantic distinctions.

4. The phonemic system of Boukidaren Tarifit dialect

Boukidaren Tarifit Berber exhibits a rich consonant inventory comprising 38 phonemes: /p, b, ḇ, m, mʷ, f, t, ṭ, θ, d, ḍ, r, ṛ, s, ṣ, z, ẓ, š, ž, ts, tʃ, j, k, kʷ, g, gʷ, w, q, qʷ, γ, χ, ʁ, ʁʷ, ɸ, ħ, ʕ, h, ɛ/[3]. In Tarifit Berber, the phonemic system has been extensively studied and documented by numerous scholars, including Chami (1979), Chtatou (1980, 1982, 1991), Hamdaoui (1985), Allati (1986), El Aissati (1989), Tangi (1991), and Dell and Tangi (1993). In contrast, the vowel system is notably limited, consisting of only three contrastive vowels: /i/, /u/, and /a/. Additionally, an epenthetic schwa /ə/[4] is frequently observed, playing a significant role in syllabification and phonological processes. This constrained yet distinctive phoneme inventory, characterized by its emphatic consonants, limited vowel system, and the presence of an epenthetic schwa, underscores the unique phonological profile of Tarifit Berber within the broader context of Berber linguistics. The systematic documentation of these features by numerous scholars has provided valuable insights into the phonological organization of the language, contributing to a deeper understanding of its typological and structural properties.

5. The intensive aorist in Amazigh

Following Karim Bensoukas (2012), the intensive aorist in Amazigh emerges as a particularly rich area of inquiry. This verb form is well-documented for its morphological complexity and distinct aspectual marking, typically associated with iterative, durative, or continuous actions. The intricate nature of its formation has been recognized in a wide array of foundational studies, including those by Abdelmassih (1968), Basset (1929, 1952), Dell and Elmedlaoui (1991), El Mountassir (1989), Lahrouchi (2001, 2010), MacBride (2004)[5]among others. Often referred to as the frequentative form, intensive verb morphology conveys heightened intensity, repetition, or emphasis, contributing significantly to the expression of habituality, continuity, and the recurrence of events, as emphasized by Galand (1977, 1987), Cadi (1981), El Mountassir (1989), and Guerssel (1983).

Beyond well-established mechanisms such as gemination and tt-prefixation, vowel epenthesis has also been recognized as a morphologically motivated process contributing to the structure of intensive forms. As argued by Bensoukas (1994) and Lahrouchi (2001), this phenomenon is not merely phonological but reflects deeper morphological constraints. Within this morphological framework, the Ayt Oulichek dialect of Tarifit offers a particularly compelling case, exhibiting both typological alignment with other Amazigh varieties and localized morphological innovations. As demonstrated by Amrous and Bensoukas (2005), the dialect adopts canonical strategies for forming the intensive aorist. Remarkably, however, it also features a structurally distinct formation known as the negative intensive aorist. Recent findings by Gutova (2024) further elaborate on this pattern, noting that the negative imperfective is attested in only a limited number of verbs and is geographically restricted to Mezduy and parts of Zerqet. In these contexts, the negative imperfective is derived from the standard imperfective through a systematic vowel shift, typically from /a/ to /i/—for example, degdeg (IPFV) → ddegdag (IPFV.AFFIRMATIVE) → ddegdig[6] (IPFV.NEGATIVE), meaning ‘to beat’.

Notably, this phenomenon shows structural parallels with Eastern Moroccan dialects such as Figuig, as well as with extra-Moroccan varieties including Tuareg and Ghadamsi. As noted by Kossmann (1989) and Chaker (1996), these polarity-based verb forms may constitute remnants of archaic negation morphology inherited from Proto-Berber, thereby offering insights into the historical stratification of the Berber verbal system.

6. Analysis and discussion

To analyze the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel Tarifit verb suffixed reduplication[7] data using, I need to consider the constraints that govern the phonological processes involved. OT is a theoretical framework in phonology that uses a set of ranked constraints to determine the optimal output form from a set of possible candidates. The constraints can be either dominated (lower-ranked) or undominated (higher-ranked), and their interactions explain why certain phonological patterns emerge.  In the OT framework, central to phonological processes and reduplicative phenomena is the Correspondence Theory which formally includes a set of constraints governing the correspondence (i.e. ‘faithfulness’) between the input and the output, and the identity between the reduplicant and the base (McCarthy and Prince, 1995). These constraints can be formalized as follows:

(1)

• The MAX Constraint Family:
• General Schema

Every segment of S, has a correspondent in S₂

• Specific Instantiations

MAX-BR

Every segment of the base has a correspondent in the reduplicant.

(Reduplication is total.)

MAX-IO

Every segment of the input has a correspondent in the output.

(No phonological deletion.)

• The DEP Constraint Family:

General Schema

Every segment of S, has a correspondent in S

(S, is “dependent on” S₁.)

Specific Instantiations

DEP-BR

Every segment of the reduplicant has a correspondent in the base.

(Prohibits fixed default segmentism in the reduplicant.)

DEP-IO

Every segment of the output has a correspondent in the input.

(Prohibits phonological epenthesis.)

• The IDENT(F) Constraint Family:

General Schema

IDENT(F)

Let ” be a segment in S and $ be any correspondent of ” in S . 1 2

If ” is [(F] , then $ is [(F].

(Correspondent segments are identical in feature F).

Specific Instantiations

IDENT–BR(F)

Reduplicant correspondents of a base [γF] segment are also [γF].

IDENT–IO(F)

Output correspondents of an input [γF] segment are also [γF].

In addition to the constraints previously discussed, the analysis also integrates additional correspondence constraints crucial in determining the form of reduplicative structures, namely LINEARITY, CONTIGUITY, and ANCHORING. These constraints regulate the alignment, ordering, and cohesion of phonological material between the reduplicant (the copied element) and the base. LINEARITY enforces a strict correspondence in segmental sequence, prohibiting reordering or metathesis between the reduplicant and the base. CONTIGUITY ensures that both the reduplicant and the base remain internally uninterrupted, barring the introduction of extraneous material within or between them. ANCHORING specifies that specific edges (e.g., left, right, or internal boundaries) of the reduplicant must align with corresponding positions in the base, securing their positional fidelity. Collectively, these constraints ensure the phonological and morphological integrity of reduplicative forms, balancing the need for faithful replication of the base with adherence to the language’s structural rules.

Furthermore, the analysis extends the list of constraints to include syllable structure constraints, which are crucial for understanding the phonological well-formedness of reduplicative forms. These constraints include ONSET, which stipulates that syllables must have onsets (Prince and Smolensky, 1993), and *COMPLEX, which prohibits complex syllable margins, such as consonant clusters at the beginning or end of syllables (Prince and Smolensky, 1993). The ONSET constraint ensures that reduplicative forms avoid vowel-initial syllables, which are dispreferred in many languages, including Boukidaren Tarifiyt Berber. Meanwhile, *COMPLEX restricts the formation of complex onsets or codas, often leading to phonological repairs such as epenthesis or truncation in reduplicative forms. For example, in partial reduplication, the insertion of an epenthetic vowel (e.g., e) to break up illicit consonant clusters can be attributed to the high ranking of *COMPLEX in the constraint hierarchy. These syllable structure constraints interact with correspondence constraints like MAX-BR (Mccarthy and Prince, 1995), Max-IR (Mccarthy and Prince, 1995) and Max-IB (Mccarthy and Prince, 1995) to shape the reduplicant’s phonological form. By integrating these constraints into the analysis, we gain a more comprehensive understanding of how reduplicative structures are shaped by the interplay of phonological and morphological factors, ensuring that they adhere to the language’s phonological rules while fulfilling their grammatical or semantic functions.

7. Partial reduplication

Partial reduplication in the Boukidaren  Ayt Waryaghel Tarifiyt dialect is divided into two categories: reduplicating prefixes and reduplicating suffixes. However, the Optimality Theory (OT) analysis for these two categories cannot be combined, as they involve distinct phonological and morphological processes. In this study, I adopt an approach focused on analyzing partial reduplication that involves only reduplicating suffixes, as this pattern is more systematically tied to grammatical functions such as aspectual marking. As already mentioned, Boukidaren Tarifiyt Berber dialect exhibits total reduplication, a phenomenon closely related to and often coexisting with partial reduplication. As hypothesized by Moravcsik (1978), languages that employ partial reduplication typically also make use of full reduplication, suggesting a universal tendency for reduplicative systems to encompass both partial and total forms. Total reduplication involves the complete repetition of a base, whether it is a root, stem, or word, and it often serves to express a range of grammatical and semantic functions, such as marking intensity, or iterative actions, as well as conveying aspectual meanings like continuative, frequentative, habitual, imperfective, intransitive, iterative, or progressive (Moravcsik 1978). For example, in the Boukidaren Tarifiyt Berber, total reduplication is observed in forms such as wanwan (a type of bird), taytay (a type of bird), ṣayṣay (a type of bird), and ʁisbiʁ (a type of bird), where the entire base is duplicated to convey a specific semantic function related to echoism.

In the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel Tarifiyt dialect, total reduplication is particularly associated with echoic expressions, a distinctive form of linguistic representation that involves the repetition of words for aesthetic or expressive effect. Echoism encompasses both primary onomatopoeia, which involves the direct imitation of naturally occurring sounds through sound symbolism, and secondary onomatopoeia, which relies on a natural correspondence between sound and meaning. This phenomenon highlights the dialect’s use of reduplication not only for grammatical purposes but also for expressive and mimetic effects, enriching its phonological and morphological repertoire. The coexistence of total and partial reduplication in Tarifit underscores the dialect’s reliance on reduplication as a central morphological strategy. While total reduplication involves the full copying of the base, partial reduplication typically entails the repetition of only a segment, syllable, or subset of the base, often accompanied by phonological modifications such as vowel alternation. For instance, in partial reduplication, the epenthetic vowel /e/ may be inserted to break consonant clusters in the base, and the reduplicant may exhibit vowel alternation (e.g., [e] → i; [e]→[u]), as seen in forms like ittferfir ‘is fluttering’ (from fr) or ittbeqbuq ‘is gurgling’ (from bq).

8. The Data

In the Ayt Waryaghel Tarifit dialect, a significant type of reduplication is called partial reduplication. In this process, a syllable is added to the base, but it undergoes a specific phonological change known as ablaut (vowel alternation). This type of reduplication typically involves the base being altered by a shift in vowel quality, which distinguishes it from full or partial reduplication. Some types of partial reduplication can be illustrated as below:

(2)

Based on a statistical corpus analysis of the Boukidaren Ayt-Waryaghel Tarifit dialect, spoken in the eastern part of the Rif region, it is evident that reduplication in this dialect predominantly involves the partial repetition of the base or a segment of a word. The data[8] demonstrate that partial reduplication in Boukidaren Tarifit Berber frequently involves vowel alternation (ablaut) in verbs.

According to the verb data collected above, partial reduplication is characterized by the alternation of the vowel e to i in the reduplicant. This alternation is influenced by two key factors: (1) the insertion of an epenthetic vowel [e] at the word level to break up consonant clusters, and (2) the presence of the progressive prefix tt-, which triggers the reduplication process. For example, in verbs like ittferfir (from fr), the epenthetic [e] in the base ‘fer’ alternates to [i] in the reduplicant ‘fir’, resulting in the form ittferfir.

This pattern of partial reduplication, combined with vowel alternation, highlights the interplay between morphological processes (such as prefixation and reduplication) and phonological processes (such as epenthesis and vowel harmony) in the Boukidaren Ayt-Waryaghel Tarifit dialect. The recurrence of this structure across the data underscores its systematic nature and its role in the grammatical and phonological organization of the dialect.

Generally, reduplicated forms of the intensive verb in the Boukidaren Ayt-Waryaghel Tarifit dialect indicate a continuous process and the progressive form (e.g., fr-fer). This is achieved by adding the prefix tt- before the base and reduplicating the base. When the base starts with a cluster of consonants (such as fr, xr, bṛ, bš, kr), the following processes occur, as in (3).

• Epenthesis of Semivowel /ə/:
• To break up the consonant clusters at the root, an epenthetic [e] is inserted in the second output. This helps in preventing complex consonantal clusters such as ber, ker, bec, fer by creating a smoother structure for reduplication.
• Example: fr → fer, bṛ → beṛ, bš → beš, kr → ker.
• Progressive Prefixation:
• When the tt- prefix is added to the verb, it appears in forms like ittber, ittker, ittbec, ittfer.
• This tt- prefix marks the verb as progressive or in the continuous tense.
• Vowel Alternation ([e] → [i]):
• The next stage in the reduplication process is the vowel alternation, where the epenthetic [e] changes to [i] in the reduplicated form, resulting in final forms like ittkerkir, ittferfir.
• This [e → i] alternation appears to follow a pattern that links the verb’s tense (continuation) with the phonological structure of the reduplicated output.

When the tt-prefix is added to the base, it marks the verb as progressive, indicating a continuous action. This prefixation results in forms like *ittbeṛ, *ittker, *ittbeš, and *ittfer. The next step in the reduplication process involves vowel alternation, where the epenthetic [e] in the reduplicant shifts to [i], leading to final forms such as ittberbir, ittkerkir, ittbebic, and ittferfir ittbeṛbiṛ, iittkerkir, ittbešbiš, and ittferfir.

This alternation, from [e] to [i], connects the verb’s tense and satisfies heavy syllable in the reduplicant— indicating a continuous action — to the phonological structure of the reduplicated form.

7. Discussion and analysis of the data

From this point forward, the discussion of reduplication will focus exclusively on ablaut words, as total reduplication does not present significant theoretical challenges within frameworks such as Optimality Theory (OT), Morphological Doubling Theory (MDT), or Minimal Reduplication (MR). Total reduplication, which involves the complete repetition of a base without phonological modifications such as epenthesis or deletion, is relatively straightforward to analyze. In cases where the input words undergo no epenthesis or deletion, the constraint ranking for total reduplication can be established as follows:

(4)

RED≤σ: This constraint ranks the highest and ensures that the reduplicant is no longer than one syllable. It enforces a strict limitation on the size of the reduplicant, prioritizing monosyllabic outputs.

Max-IO: Ranking second highest, this constraint prevents the loss of any element from the base (e.g., wan, tay, say). It ensures that all segments of the input base are preserved in the output.

Max-IR: This constraint ranks third highest and requires that input segments have maximal correspondents in the output reduplicant. It ensures that the reduplicant faithfully reflects the segments of the input.

Max-BR: Ranking below Max-IR, this constraint requires the reduplicant to fully copy the base. However, it is subordinate to Max-IO and Max-IR, as the reduplicant must first adhere to syllable size limitations and input-output faithfulness.

Onset: This constraint, which mandates that syllables have onsets, ranks below Max-BR. It ensures that reduplicative forms do not violate syllable structure by lacking an onset.

**COMPLEXOns/COMPLEX Cod: These constraints, which penalize complex onsets and codas, rank below Onset. They ensure that reduplicative forms avoid complex syllable margins, favoring simpler syllable structures.

Contig-BR: This constraint ranks the lowest and requires that the reduplicant be a contiguous substring of the base. While it plays a role in ensuring the reduplicant’s integrity, it is subordinate to higher-ranking constraints that prioritize syllable size and faithfulness.

This constraint hierarchy reflects the prioritization of syllable size limitations (RED≤σ) and faithfulness to the input (Max-IO, Max-IR) over base-reduplicant correspondence (Max-BR) and syllable structure constraints (Onset, *COMPLEX Ons/*COMPLEX Cod). The lowest-ranked constraint, Contig-BR, ensures that the reduplicant maintains a contiguous relationship with the base but is overridden by higher-ranking constraints when necessary.

Following OT tableau linear for domination (Rene kager ,1999), the constraints are placed on the top row from left, the highest ranked, to right, the lowest ranked. The leftmost column exhibits all output candidates. The symbol ‘*’ indicates a violation, and ‘!’ a fatal violation by which a candidate is eliminated. Shading emphasizes the irrelevance of the constraint to the fate of the candidate. A loser’s cells are shaded after the fatal confrontation. The symbol refers to the optimal output.

Let us now examine partial reduplication in the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel Tarifit (BAWTD) dialect using the base √kr This analysis will be framed within Optimality Theory (OT), a theoretical framework that explains phonological and morphological processes through the interaction of ranked constraints. Below, we illustrate how partial reduplication operates in BAWTD and analyze it using OT principles.

(5)

In tableau (5), Uniformity IO plays a crucial role to reject the competed candidate (c), and ensures that the reduplicant does not undergo to any coalescence. The anti-coalescence constraint is dominated by Max IR constraint, which requires that input segments have maximal output reduplicant correspondents. The candidate (a) is ruled out by two violations, one is fatal when deleting input segments (semi-vowel) and violating Max IR,. Candidate (d) is also eliminated by Max BR, which requires every segment of the base has a correspondent in the reduplicant. The candidate (e) violates the highest constraint Align-Prefix- L more severely than any of its competitors. However, all these competitors respect the position of imperfective prefix always anchored at the left of the word. The candidate (b) wins out and is the optimal output due to of the non-violations of the constraints. So, the optimal candidate, tt/ker-ker, is chosen due to its satisfaction of all relevant constraints. It preserves the integrity of the input while respecting the constraints of Max IR, Max BR, Align-Prefix-L, Uniformity IO, and RED ≤ σ. The candidate fully copies the base verb, which is a key feature in this reduplication process.

While candidate (b) fully satisfies the constraints, it has been pointed out that this represents a total reduplication rather than partial reduplication. The fact that the base verb is fully copied in the optimal output suggests that the partial reduplication phenomenon in Boukidaren Tarifit might not be sufficiently accounted for in this analysis. This could indicate that the partial reduplication is not merely a matter of constraint interaction in the standard OT constrains but might require additional constraints.

One possible resolution for the fact is to at least activate the dominated IDENT-family of faithfulness constraint on feature specifications (IDENT-V(F)) which requires input and output forms to be identical concerning feature is not violated. IDENT-V (F) is of great relevance to this analysis for it preserves vowel features. Since this constraint is violated and dominated by the MAX family of constraints, it is added only to rule out the optimal candidate in (1). In BAWTD partial reduplication, it is preferable to change the vowel feature of [e] rather than to keep the base or the input segments in the reduplicant. To arrive at actual base optimal-reduplicant, we must substitute a mid-central unrounded vowel [e] to [i], which is a high front vowel as illustrated in the following diagram:

(6)

Crucially, as has been diagramed, to satisfy the output in (6), I follow Minkova’s (2002) INTEREST constraint, then I propose *BR (mid) which requires that correspondent segments have different values for the feature [mid]. To prove our point, let us inspect tableau (7). This includes all five candidates of the previous tableau, plus one new candidate (f). The tableau shows the highest constraint (*BR (mid)) and illustrates the full constraint ranking in action.

(7)

Here The *BR(mid) constraint plays a crucial role in this analysis, as it resolves the erroneous prediction in tableau (1) by decisively eliminating the candidate (b) from the highest ranking. Tableau (2) further illustrates that partial reduplication in the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel Tarifit dialect (BAWTD) is driven by a vowel ablaut process, with *BR(mid) ranked as the second-highest constraint. This constraint penalizes the retention of mid vowels in the reduplicant, favoring their alteration to other vowels. Specifically, the mid vowel [e] in the base is changed to [i] in the reduplicant, resulting in a fatal violation of the lower-ranked faithfulness constraint IDENT-V(F) (McCarthy 1995). This pattern underscores the dominance of markedness constraints over faithfulness constraints in this phonological process.

This state of affairs suggests that the satisfaction of markedness constraints must be driven by the need to vowelize imperfect syllables, typically those with a CVC structure. In BAWTD, partial reduplication in imperfective verbs predominantly involves roots composed of two-consonant clusters (e.g., kr, fr, hr…). This structural requirement ensures that the reduplicant surfaces with the altered vowel [i], conforming to the phonological patterns of the dialect. This produces a pattern in which input feature specifications are not realized. Thus, the interaction of markedness and faithfulness constraints, along with the specific structural properties of the roots, seems to shape the reduplication process in BAWTD.

a key question arises here: why does the inserted vowel /e/, which vowelizes the imperfect syllable, occur medially, resulting in a CVC structure? This medial placement may be motivated by the need to maintain syllable well-formedness while adhering to the dialect’s phonological constraints. The medial position of the vowel (e) could serve to balance the demands of markedness (e.g., avoiding complex consonant clusters) and faithfulness (e.g., preserving root integrity), ultimately optimizing the syllable structure within the phonological system of BAWTD. Further analysis is needed to fully explain the preference for medial vowel insertion.

As previously noted, one plausible explanation for the medial insertion of the semivowel, rather than final insertion (e.g., ker vs. *kre), is driven by the requirement for syllable well-formedness. Typological evidence suggests that this pattern is not arbitrary. The candidate *kre is ruled out because, on the one hand, “schwa” never occurs in an open syllable. On the other hand, medial insertion serves as a strategy to resolve violations of the coda condition by breaking up the consonant cluster in the imperfective verb skeleton (e.g., tt.ker-kr). This process aligns with and satisfies the underlying syllable structure constraints of the dialect. Thus, the medial placement of the semivowel not only adheres to the licensing requirements of schwa but also ensures the preservation of well-formed syllable types, effectively addressing phonological conflicts inherent in the verb morphology of this dialect. Consider the following diagram for illustration:

(8)

The diagram above shows that the  prefixation of tt- in the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel Tarifit dialect is accompanied by two interrelated phonological processes: the insertion of a medial vowel within the root (e.g., kr → ker) and the attachment of prefixed personal pronouns (i- for “he,” n- for “we). These processes collectively serve to conjugate the verb in the intensive imperfective form. Crucially, the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel Tarifit dialect systematically rejects CCCV syllable structures, which explains why the addition of a personal pronoun to the base form ttker-kir results in a three-syllable structure rather than two syllables.

Of interest here, the first element of the geminated prefix (t) becomes the coda of the initial syllable, forming the syllable [σ-it], while the second element of the geminated prefix tt- combines with the following consonant [k] to create a complex onset [tk], yielding the syllable ker. This restructuring ensures that the resulting syllabic structure adheres to the dialect’s phonological constraints, particularly the avoidance of CCCV sequences and the preference for well-formed syllables.

Let us now examine a case involving the coda condition by analyzing the root /kr/ as the input. In this analysis, we will consider Parse-Seg, a syllable structure constraint that requires all segments to be parsed into syllables, as the highest-ranking constraint, and Dep-ə constraint as the lowest one. The Parse-Seg dominates BR (mid) and Max BR. Below is a tableau that demonstrates the interaction of these constraints and the necessary provisions for their ranking.

(9)

As demonstrated in the tableau above, the deactivation of Max IR and the activation of Parse-Seg play a pivotal role in determining the optimal candidate. Candidate (f), t.tker-kir, emerges as the winner due to its compliance with the higher-ranked constraints, namely Align-Prefix, L, Parse-Seg, and *BR (mid). Despite its violations of Max BR and DEP-ə, candidate (f) satisfies the most critical constraints, thereby securing its position as the optimal output. However, this analysis invites further scrutiny, particularly regarding how the inclusion of an additional candidate, such as t.tker.tkir, might alter the outcome.

If t.tker.tkir were introduced into the competition, it would likely dominate the hierarchy by satisfying the highest-ranked constraints without incurring significant violations. This would effectively exclude candidate (f) from the top ranking, as t.tker.tkir would align more closely with the demands of Align-Prefix, L, Parse-Seg, *BR (mid), and Max BR. Such a scenario underscores the importance of constraint ranking and the nuanced interplay between faithfulness and markedness constraints in determining the optimal reduplicative form.

Moreover, the inclusion of t.tker.tkir would necessitate a deeper analysis of the constraints governing reduplicant positioning. Specifically, it would require us to reconsider the role of Max BR and also Anchoring-BR (not included in tableau) in shaping the output. While candidate (f) violates these constraints, t.tker.tkir might adhere to them more strictly, thereby offering a more balanced alignment with the constraint hierarchy. This, in turn, compels us to refine our understanding of how reduplicative structures are evaluated, particularly in light of the dialect’s prohibition of complex syllabic structures such as CCCV.

To account for this issue, I propose the introduction of a new syllabic markedness constraint: *Complex ONS-R: Onsets are simple in the reduplicant. This constraint specifically targets the reduplicant, requiring that its onset consist of no more than a single consonant. By doing so, it ensures that the reduplicant adheres to the phonological restrictions of the BAWT-dialect, which disallows complex onsets of the type CCCV. This constraint interacts with other constraints to shape the optimal output, providing a more nuanced analysis of reduplicative structures.

To be clear, if, for example, t.tker.tkir cannot avoid complex onsets (e.g., if the syllabic structure of t.tker results in a CCCV sequence, such as /tt-ker/), it would violate *Complex ONS-R. This violation would disqualify t.tker.tkir as the optimal candidate, as it fails to adhere to the phonological restrictions of the BAWT-dialect. In this case, t.tker.kir might emerge as the more optimal form. Although t.tker.kir violates Max BR (by truncating the base ker-kir to kir) and potentially Anchoring-BR (by misaligning the edges of the base and reduplicant), it adheres more strictly to Complex ONS-R by avoiding complex onsets in the reduplicant. This adherence to the dialect’s phonological restrictions makes t.tker.kir a more viable candidate.

To recapitulate, based on the analysis of the typological structure, let us consider the mechanisms and conditions that regulate partial reduplication in the formation of imperfective intensive forms. An illustration is given below:

   (10)

It is observed from (10) that RED copies the verbal root kr along with the epenthetic vowel in the OUTPUT /ker/, but excludes the second consonant of the morphological prefix tt-. In my view, this is due to phonological constraints that prevent the copying of the prefix, as well as morphological factors that entirely prohibit the prefix tt from being included within the reduplicative domain of the word. Morphologically, the prefix tt serves as a fixed segmental unit that marks the imperfective intensive form of the verb. Its position outside the reduplicative domain suggests that it is treated as a separate morphological constituent, distinct from the root or the base and reduplicant. This separation is likely enforced by morphological constraints that prevent the prefix from being incorporated into the reduplicative structure. Such constraints may include Align-Prefix, which requires the prefix to align with the left edge of the word, and Morphological Integrity, which prohibits the disruption of affixal boundaries during reduplication. These constraints ensure that the prefix tt- remains outside the reduplicative domain, preserving its morphological function and phonological independence.

These phenomena also occur in nouns that begin with a root vowel [a], as illustrated in the following examples:

(11)

• Anecnac  * anecanac
• Aferfer  * aferafer
• Aherher  * aheraher
• Aqecqac * aqecaqac
• Aqezqez * aqezaqez

It is also observed that RED cannot copy the vocalic root from the base (e.g., afer, aher, anec), likely due to the constraint Max-ROOT VOWEL (McCarthy and Prince 1995), and instead resorts to truncation. This suggests that the reduplicative process is influenced by both phonological and morphological factors, which limit the copying of vocalic material and favor a truncated form.

In nouns like aferfur, aherhur, and anecnac, the reduplicant is formed at an internal juncture, leading to local reduplication. Truncation at internal junctures allows the reduplicant to remain closely aligned with the root structure while avoiding full duplication of the vocalic root. For instance, in aferafer, the reduplicant /afer/ reflects a truncated base form rather than full repetition, thereby respecting phonological constraints such as Max-ROOT VOWEL and Complex ONS-R, the latter of which prohibits complex onsets in the reduplicant.

By contrast, opposite-edge reduplication where material from one edge of the word is copied to the other (e.g., fer-afer), is disfavored, as it disrupts the morphological structure and may violate constraints like Align-Root and Morphological Integrity. The preference for internal reduplication thus ensures that reduplicative forms in the dialect are phonologically well-formed, morphologically coherent, and semantically faithful to the base.

9. Summary

This study undertook a formal investigation of ablaut in partial reduplicative intensive verbs in the Boukidaren Ayt Waryaghel dialect of Tarifit Berber, using Correspondence Theory as its central analytical framework. The key finding is that vowel alternation in reduplicated forms—most notably from [e] to [i]—is not a product of phonological constraints but rather a morphologically conditioned process. This alternation functions as a morphological marker of intensification, aspectual modification, and iteration.

Using Optimality Theory, the analysis captures the interaction among constraints such as Max-BR, Dep-IO, Ident-F, RED≤σ, *BR(mid), and *Complex Ons-R. Furthermore, the study differentiates between partial reduplication and its total counterpart, noting that full reduplication often serves echoic or onomatopoeic purposes due to its phonological transparency and expressive capacity.

Semantically, the ablaut patterns in these verbs serve as morphological indicators of sensory-imitative meanings, enhancing the expressive capacity of the dialect’s verbal morphology. Forms like ttkerkir, ttferfir, and ttwešwiš demonstrate a regular system of vowel alternation that cannot be adequately explained by epenthesis alone, but instead points to a morphologically driven process shaped by prosodic structure and constraint interaction.

Ultimately, this research advances our understanding of how morphology and phonology interact in Berber, highlighting the role of both language-specific constraints and broader typological patterns in shaping reduplicative structures.

References

• Abdel-Massih, E. T. (1968). Tamazight verb structure: A generative approach. Bloomington: Indiana University Publications.
• Amrous, N., & Bensoukas, K. (2003). Tarifyt long vowels and diphthongs: Independent phonemes or simple phonetic variants of the basic Amazigh vowels? Paper presented at the seminar “Standardisation de l’Amazighe”, organized by the IRCAM, Rabat, Morocco, 8–9 December 2003. In A. Boumalk & M. Ameur (Eds.), Standardisation de l’amazighe (pp. 117–139). Rabat: IRCAM Publications.
• Amrous, N., & Bensoukas, K. (2004). Tarifit long vowels and diphthongs: Independent phonemes or simple phonetic variants of the basic Amazigh vowels? In A. Boumalk & M. Ameur (Eds.), Standardisation de l’Amazighe. Rabat: IRCAM publications.
• Amrous, N., & Bensoukas, K. (2009). Simple verb morphology in Ait Oulichek Tarifiyt: How divergent? In A. Bouhjar & H. Souifi (Eds.), L’amazighe dans l’Oriental et le Nord du Maroc: Variation et convergence. Actes du colloque en hommage à Naïma Louali, Oujda, 10 et 11 novembre 2005 (pp. 51–67). Rabat: Institut Royal de la Culture Amazighe.
• Basset, A. (1929). La langue berbère. Morphologie. Le verbe – étude de thèmes. Paris: Librairie Ernest Leroux.
• Basset, A. (1952). La langue berbère. London: Dawsons of Pall Mall. (Original work published for the International African Institute)
• Bensoukas, K. (2012). Morphological haplology in Amazigh. Asinag, 7, 151–171.
• Bouzidi, S., Bouarourou, F., Vaxelaire, B., & Behr, I. (2015). La réduplication et l’expression de l’aspect et du mode de procès en berbère (kabyle et rifain). Linguistique et Langues Africaines, 1(1), 1–24. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280804107_La_reduplication_et_l_expression_de_l_aspect_et_du_mode_de_proces_en_berbere_kabyle_et_rifain
• Cadi, K. (1981). Le verbe en Tarifit (Maroc-Nord): formes et valences (Thèse de 3ème cycle, EPHE-Université de Paris III).
• Chaker, S. (1996). Quelques remarques préliminaires sur la négation en berbère. In D. Caubet & S. Chaker (Eds.), La négation en berbère et en arabe marocain (pp. 9–22). Paris: L’Harmattan.
• Chami, M. (1979). Un parler amazigh du Rif marocain: Approche phonologique et morphologique (Thèse du 3e cycle, Université Paris-V).
• Chtatou, M. (1982). Aspects of the phonology of a Berber dialect of the Rif (Ph.D. dissertation, University of London/SOAS).
• Dell, F., & Elmedlaoui, M. (1991). Clitic ordering, morphology and phonology in the verbal complex of Imdlawn Tashlhiyt Berber. Langues Orientales Anciennes–Philologie et Linguistique, 3, 77–104.
• Dell, F., & Tangi, O. (1993). On the vocalization of /r/ in Ath-Sidhar Rifian Berber. Linguistica Communicatio, 5(1–2), 5–53.
• El Aissati, A. (1989). A study of the phonotactics of Asht Touzine Tarifiyt dialect (D.E.S. thesis, Mohammed V University, Faculty of Letters, Rabat).
• El Mountassir, A. (1989). Lexique du verbe en Tachelhit (parler d’Inezgane-Maroc) (Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris V, René Descartes, Sciences Humaines, Sorbonne).
• Galand, L. (1977). Continuité et renouvellement d’un système verbal: Le cas du berbère. Bulletin de la Société Linguistique de Paris, 72(1), 275–303.
• Galand, L. (1987). Les emplois de l’aoriste sans particule en berbère. In H. Jungraithmayr & W. Müller (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Hamito-Semitic Congress (pp. 361–379). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Guerssel, M. (1983). Constraints on phonological rules. Linguistic Analysis, 3(3), 267–305.
• Inkelas, S., & Zoll, C. (2005). Reduplication: Doubling in morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kager, R. (1999). Optimality theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kiparsky, P. (1986). The phonology of reduplication. Unpublished manuscript, Stanford University.
• Kirchner, J. S. (2012). Minimal reduplication (Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz).
• Kossmann, M. (1989). L’inaccompli négatif en berbère. Études et Documents Berbères, 6, 19–29.
• Lahrouchi, M. (2001). Aspects morpho-phonologiques de la dérivation verbale en berbère (Parler Chleuh d’Agadir) (Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris VII).
• Lahrouchi, M. (2010). On the internal structure of Tashlhiyt Berber triconsonantal roots. Linguistic Inquiry, 41, 255–285.
• MacBride, A. I. (2004). A constraint based approach to morphology (Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA).
• Marantz, A. (1982). Re reduplication. Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 435–482.
• McCarthy, J. (1995). Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. In University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics, 18: Papers in Optimality Theory. [Rutgers Optimality Archive #60].
• McCarthy, J., & Prince, A. (1986). Prosodic morphology. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts.
• Minkova, D. (2002). Ablaut reduplication in English. English Language and Linguistics, 6, 133–169.
• Moravcsik, E. A. (1978). Reduplicative constructions. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of human language (pp. 297–334). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Nadarajan, S. (2006). A crosslinguistic study of reduplication. Arizona Working Papers in SLAT, 13, 1–25. https://journals.librarypublishing.arizona.edu/jslat/article/id/209/
• Prince, A., & Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Ms. Rutgers University and University of Colorado at Boulder.
• Rubino, C. (2005). Reduplication: Form, function, and distribution. In B. Hurch (Ed.), Studies on reduplication (pp. 11–29). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Tangi, O. (1991). Aspects de la phonologie d’un parler berbère du Maroc: Ath-Sidhar (Rif) (Thèse du Nouveau Doctorat, Université de Paris VIII).
• Wilbur, R. (1973). The phonology of reduplication (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois).
• Wiltshire, C., & Marantz, A. (2000). Reduplication. In G. Booij, C. Lehmann, & J. Mugdan (Eds.), Morphology: An international handbook on inflection and word-formation (pp. 557–567). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter

Following Karim Bensoukas (2012), epenthetic vowel realization in Amazigh exhibits a dual tendency: it defaults to /a/ (the system’s least marked vowel) or mirrors the vocalic nucleus of the base form—a pattern first documented by Basset (1929) and later systematized in Bensoukas’work (2001b, 2002, 2004b). This generalization, however, is nuanced by cross-dialectal variation, wherein divergent epenthetic vowels emerge in specific phonological or morphological contexts. Similarly, in other Amazigh varieties, the high front vowel [i] surfaces under analogous conditions, as evidenced by derivational pairs such as frfr ~ ttfrfir (‘to flutter’).

[2] Echoism is a distinctive form of expression that involves the repetition of words for aesthetic or expressive effect. It encompasses primary onomatopoeia, which directly imitates natural sounds through sound symbolism, and secondary onomatopoeia, where the sound of word forms is perceived as fitting their meaning, often leading to a sense of universality in how speakers conceptualize and construct images. The creation of onomatopoeic words is shaped by the linguistic system of a language, meaning a word can be considered onomatopoeic even if only part of it imitates a sound. This accounts for culture-specific imitations of natural sounds, such as “knock-knock” or “splish-splash,” which may differ across languages. Despite cultural and linguistic differences, common patterns in expressing concepts like fairness, equality, or kinship can be observed across languages, reflecting shared human experiences and perceptions (see Shanthi Nadarajan:2006).

[3] The phonemic system of the Boukidaren Tarifit dialect remains highly questionable and warrants a more systematic study to clarify its characteristics.

[4] The status of the schwa in Amazigh phonology has been a topic of ongoing discussion among scholars. Some researchers, including Guerssel (1976), Saib (1976), Tangi (1991), and Faizi (2002), posit that the schwa serves as an underlying vowel in the phonological structure. Conversely, another group of scholars, such as Prasse (1975), Basset (1952:7), Galand (1988:214), Chami (1979:172), Dell and Tangi (1992:130), Iazzi (1991:9), Penchoen (1973:6), Abdelmassih (1968:24-25), Chtatou (1991:43), Bader (1985:231), and Kossmann (1995), contend that the schwa is epenthetic in nature. From this perspective, its primary function is to aid in syllabification and to simplify the articulation of consonant clusters (see Amrous, N., & Bensoukas, K., 2003).

[5] All references originally cited in Bensoukas’ Morphological Haplology in Amazigh (2009:151) have been reviewed and contextually verified for this study.

[6] While ‘ddegdig’ is attested in Boukidaren Tarifit, it remains an isolated lexical item rather than evidence of a systematic morphological pattern. No broader class of intensive verbs characterized by double gemination combined with prefinal vowel change(ablaut) is attested in the dialect, rendering ddegdig a morphophonological anomaly within the intensive verb system.

[7] Terminologically speaking, suffixed reduplication, in this context, refers to a mechanical process in which a segment of a word is repeated and attached to the base form, resembling the structure of a suffix. This reduplicative segment occupies the position typically held by a suffix in the word.

[8].I selected this data because it demonstrates that partial reduplication in Boukidaren Tarifit Berber is consistently accompanied by vowel alternation (ablaut) in a specific subset of verbs. My analysis focuses exclusively on these forms, as ablaut does not occur elsewhere in the verbal system of the dialect. This phenomenon appears to be limited to what I refer to as echoic verbs, which provide the only context in which ablaut surfaces. Although previous studies have explored reduplication in Berber from phonological and morphological perspectives, they have not identified ablaut as a distinct and systematic process. By isolating this pattern in echoic verbs, I aim to uncover a previously undocumented morpho-phonological feature of Boukidaren Tarifit Berber.