What is a root? A Stem? (Re: Siouan root constraints)

[Koontz John E]

On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 cstelfer at ucalgary.ca wrote:
> PS.  I use the word "root", but I think most Siouanists prefer "stem".  If
> someone wants to clarify the difference between these two terms in their
> Siouan usage I would appreciate it, but perhaps that's a question for
> another day.

I'm not sure I'm representative, but for me a root is a minimal
non-inflectional, non-derivational morphological element, while a stem is
something that can stand alone as a word, e.g., a noun stem (s^uNka as
opposed to just s^uNk-) and/or be inflected, e.g., a syncopating verb
stem.  I think this is the usual Indo-Europeanist logic, though I gather
the behavioral basis of the approach tends to fall apart at the Germanic
or Romance level.

To a certain limited extent I'm prepared to refer to the independent form
of a noun or verb (including only the additional stem-forming -a or -e or
-ya or -ye) as a root.

At least one problematic issue here would be the status of the form
underlying a suppletive non-third person inflected form.  It's
inflectable, but can't stand alone.  This only occurs with inflectable
forms, being inflectable suffices.

So sap- and s^uNk- are roots, and sapa or s^uNka are both stems and also
roots (by courtesy), while yuha is a stem made up of a derivational prefix
yu- and a root -ha, and any adverbial root would be a root that isn't a
stem.  I suppose paha would be an example of a noun form that was both a
stem and the root.

In Omaha, e=...e (first, second) ~ e (third) ~ dhaN (inclusive) are the
suppletive stems of 'to say'.  Or dadi (first, vocative) ~ (dh)adi
(second, third) are the suppletive stems of 'father'.