262:. It's not that there are two senses of "suffix", or that the community consensus has anything to do. A suffix is a bound morpheme that is added to the end of a word, period. Whether it's inflectional or derivational is not part of the definition. "Ending" suggests derivation because that's how it's taught in schools. Inflectional endings tend to be grouped in paradigms (conjugation or declension tables) and set apart. --
81:
71:
53:
22:
224:, while listing "-ing" (which I would call an "ending"), includes neither "-s" nor "-ed," which would arguably be two of the very most common suffixes in the English language; I think this is because many people know intuitively that there is a big difference between an "ending" like "-s" and a suffix like "-ness."
386:
I am afraid the example in "For another example, the root of the
English verb form destabilized is stabil-, a form of stable that does not occur alone; the stem is deĀ·stabilĀ·ize, which includes the derivational affixes de- and -ize, but not the inflectional past tense suffix -(e)d." might be a bit
215:
In my defense, I realize now that there is a narrow sense and a broad sense of "suffix." Just as one could claim that a "lion" is distinct from a "cat" when using "cat" in a narrow sense, someone else could say that they're all "cats" and the distinction is between "great cats" and "domesticated
233:
I will yield if the community consensus is that any letters added to the end of a word qualify as a suffix, although I doubt that any list of Latin suffixes would include "-is" as a third declension genitive singular and "-amus" as first conjugation first person plural present. That is a HOE!
155:
I made a start with the definition and
English examples (could add Spanish, some Japanese, but it's rather clear as it is). Someone with a clue should write about IE verb stems, which look like a completely different thing to me (agglutinative inflection rather than derivation). --
363:
So I think the definition in the article needs some revising. It's not necessarily the part of the word that doesn't change, but rather the part of the word from which all inflected forms can be inferred.
346:
There are languages in which every part of the word can change due to inflection or suffixation, yet it is still sensible to speak of a stem. For example, the
Northern Sami verb
439:
220:
article does, noting that affixes "may be derivational, like
English -ness and pre-, or inflectional, like English plural -s and past tense -ed." And yet, the article
127:
166:
133:
444:
103:
434:
307:
I don't see a problem with it. The two concepts are very closely related, a comparison is appropriate, and if you moved the content to
94:
58:
288:
This article has quite compared stem and root in the introduction. The content that related to root, should be split out into
259:
33:
356:
is constant throughout the inflection, everything else is subject to change. But the stem of this verb is definitely
360:, which is given as an argument to the template. The template can figure out all the forms from this one stem.
252:
221:
297:
268:
201:
320:
39:
293:
258:
include inflectional suffixes, unless a clarification is made somewhere. Either that, or rename it to
234:
article. But I am happy to see that most of what I have contributed in this article has remained. ā
21:
102:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
329:
Closely related, yes, but this article conflates the two concepts on a seemingly random basis. --
308:
289:
86:
311:, then someone could complain that since it mentions "stem" so much it should be split out into
330:
263:
196:
157:
316:
174:
416:
235:
428:
369:
170:
99:
80:
412:
76:
312:
365:
348:
70:
52:
192:
217:
420:
373:
333:
324:
301:
273:
238:
206:
178:
15:
352:, whose inflection can be seen on Wiktionary. Only a single
342:"part of the word that is common to all inflected variants"
292:
or removed. However others in this article, should stay.
98:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
132:This article has not yet received a rating on the
391:might actually more directly derive from Latin
167:Knowledge:Pages needing attention/Linguistics
8:
186:My revert of "ending = suffixed inflections"
47:
440:Unknown-importance Linguistics articles
49:
19:
260:List of English derivational suffixes
7:
92:This article is within the scope of
38:It is of interest to the following
216:cats." This is precisely what the
14:
112:Knowledge:WikiProject Linguistics
445:WikiProject Linguistics articles
115:Template:WikiProject Linguistics
79:
69:
51:
20:
374:13:16, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
1:
407:is arguably not be a form of
106:and see a list of open tasks.
435:C-Class Linguistics articles
461:
421:14:00, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
325:03:40, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
302:17:14, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
274:16:44, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
239:14:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
207:03:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
179:16:55, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
134:project's importance scale
160:12:19, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
131:
64:
46:
334:08:24, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
253:List of English suffixes
222:List of English suffixes
284:Suggestion of Splitting
95:WikiProject Linguistics
403:. If that is correct,
379:Structure of the word
28:This article is rated
191:Correction: I've put
118:Linguistics articles
387:unfortunate, since
331:Kent DominicĀ·(talk)
195:up for deletion. --
290:Root_(linguistics)
87:Linguistics portal
34:content assessment
148:
147:
144:
143:
140:
139:
452:
272:
251:Hmmm... In fact
205:
165:Moved here from
120:
119:
116:
113:
110:
89:
84:
83:
73:
66:
65:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
460:
459:
455:
454:
453:
451:
450:
449:
425:
424:
384:
344:
286:
266:
264:Pablo D. Flores
199:
197:Pablo D. Flores
188:
158:Pablo D. Flores
153:
117:
114:
111:
108:
107:
85:
78:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
458:
456:
448:
447:
442:
437:
427:
426:
383:
377:
343:
340:
339:
338:
337:
336:
285:
282:
281:
280:
279:
278:
277:
276:
244:
243:
242:
241:
228:
227:
226:
225:
210:
209:
187:
184:
183:
182:
152:
149:
146:
145:
142:
141:
138:
137:
130:
124:
123:
121:
104:the discussion
91:
90:
74:
62:
61:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
457:
446:
443:
441:
438:
436:
433:
432:
430:
423:
422:
418:
414:
410:
406:
402:
398:
394:
390:
382:
378:
376:
375:
371:
367:
361:
359:
355:
351:
350:
341:
335:
332:
328:
327:
326:
322:
318:
314:
310:
306:
305:
304:
303:
299:
295:
291:
283:
275:
270:
265:
261:
257:
254:
250:
249:
248:
247:
246:
245:
240:
237:
232:
231:
230:
229:
223:
219:
214:
213:
212:
211:
208:
203:
198:
194:
190:
189:
185:
181:
180:
176:
172:
168:
163:
162:
161:
159:
150:
135:
129:
126:
125:
122:
105:
101:
97:
96:
88:
82:
77:
75:
72:
68:
67:
63:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
408:
404:
400:
396:
392:
388:
385:
380:
362:
357:
353:
347:
345:
287:
255:
164:
154:
93:
40:WikiProjects
389:destabilize
381:destabilize
317:Danielklein
294:Rock on She
109:Linguistics
100:linguistics
59:Linguistics
429:Categories
236:Revjmyoung
313:Word stem
393:stabilis
151:IE stems
405:stabil-
30:C-class
409:stable
401:-bilis
358:ealli-
349:eallit
256:should
193:Ending
171:Beland
36:scale.
413:Redav
395:from
218:Affix
169:. --
417:talk
321:talk
309:root
298:talk
269:Talk
202:Talk
175:talk
397:stÅ
370:mew
366:Rua
128:???
431::
419:)
372:)
323:)
315:!
300:)
177:)
415:(
411:.
399:+
368:(
354:l
319:(
296:(
271:)
267:(
204:)
200:(
173:(
136:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
