In English, the noun 'replicate' is pronounced with a schwa (ə) at the end while the verb is pronounced with the diphthong 'eɪ'. The same is true for the word 'duplicate'. Is there a more general trend that I am missing here?

I suppose this isn't quite the same question, but it is similar enough I think to combine: why haven't the verb forms collapsed into using the schwa?

Many thanks from a linguistics newbie.

  • 3
    I don't think I've ever encountered the noun replicate: the normal word in my experience is replica. But, as you say, duplicate shows the pattern. I'm pretty sure it's part of the pattern that causes the stress to shift in a number of Latinate bisyllabic words in the noun vs. the verb: project, progress, research (for some speakers). – Colin Fine Feb 21 at 20:18
  • Likewise syndicate. I forget the name of the rule. – jlawler Feb 21 at 23:55
  • @Colin Fine, that seems like a sound explanation. Re: replica vs replicate, I've always taken replica to mean an ontologically focused copy and replicate to mean a teleologically focused copy (e.g. a copy of the Mona Lisa would often be called a replica, but a copy of a research study is often called a replicate). – Neo Winter Scott Feb 22 at 3:56

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.