Derivation and reduplication interference

[vokzhen]

I'm interested in knowing how languages use reduplication and derivational affixes on the same side of the stem. The fictional example that made me think about this is an agent prefix tir- combined with a plural CCV-. Is it just straightforward and the entire word is used as the base, derivation and all? But despite not making as much sense, it *feels* like it should be the root that's reduplicated, not a derivational affix. It also seems like there could be cross-linguistic tendencies to not pluralize, or use an older non-productive plural. I'm wondering if anyone has natlang examples of how this would be resolved.

[CaesarVincens]

I think it can depend, a quick look at Ancient Greek verbs with reduplicated perfect tense shows prefix-reduplication-stem-personal.ending form.
On the other hand, a prefix might be used for the reduplication, it may depend on how transparent the derivation is and what form of reduplication is used (whole word, whole syllable, etc.)

[Neek]

It can depend on a lot of things, but it's really how reduplication works in the language. It is possible that a derivational affix gets reduplicated because the rule is "reduplicate first syllable" or "reduplicate stressed syllable." Just because Greek reduplicates the root syllable doesn't mean that's how your language should operate.

[Zhen Lin]

Malay has (prefixal) reduplication as well as derivational prefixes. For instance, perlahan-lahan "slowly".