fuckedupness vs. fuckedupedness

[Laurence Horn]

>I first noticed ìfuckedupednessî on a message board and thought the
>extra ìedî was interesting. According to Google, ìfuckedupnessî is
>more common, though neither is a rarity:
>
>
>
>Google web hits for fuckedupness: 900
>
>Google group hits for fuckedupness: 258
>
>
>
>Google web hits for fuckedupedness: 220
>
>Google group hits for fuckedupedness: 135
>
>
>
>My question is about ìfuckedupednessîóDoes the extra ìedî provide
>anything like the intensification infixes usually do, and if not,
>what is it doing there? Is it like the ìmaî in Homer Simpsonís
>ìedumacationî? Can you think of any similar infix examples?
>
>
>I appreciate any thoughts, suggestions, or references. Just for the
>record, I think "fuckedupedness" is more fun.
>

I don't think of it as an infix as much as redundant morphological
marking, parallel in some ways to "sleptwalked", where past tense is
doubly marked.  Neither "fuckupedness" (74 google web hits) nor
"fuckedupness" does the job satisfactorily, so when in doubt,
re-mark.   I don't think it's as much like the -ma- in "edumacation"
as it is like other cases of double marking.  Sometimes this also
occurs *around* infixes:

Cana-fuckin-'nadian (where arguably you reduplicate first, yielding
"Cananadian", which can then undergo fuckin-insertion in the formally
sanctioned way.

I recall we discussed some other examples that are better matches for
"fuckedupedness", but I can't dredge them up at the moment.

Larry