[Lexicog] Pejorative suffixes

[Ron Moe]

Oops. I think I was misled by the capitalization of 'Swede'. It is not a
proper noun. It can take the article and an adjective. 'He is a good Swede.'
So Swede:Swedish (food) fits the n:adj pattern. However the other meaning of
Swedish (the language) is a proper noun: '*He speaks a good Swedish.'

Ron Moe

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Moe [mailto:ron_moe at sil.org]
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 10:43 AM
To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Lexicog] Pejorative suffixes



Actually we need to refine the Swede:Swedish pattern slightly. One criteria
for setting up a separate sense is a change in part of speech. Since 'Swede'
is a proper noun, we probably need two senses:

2a. prop.n:adj When added to a proper noun that refers to a citizen of a
country, the resulting adjective describes something associated with the
country (Swede:Swedish). I like Swedish food. 2b. prop.n:prop.n When added
to a proper noun that refers to a citizen of a country, the resulting proper
noun refers to the language spoken by the citizens (Swede:Swedish). He
speaks Swedish fluently.

Ron Moe

-----Original Message-----
From: John Roberts [mailto:dr_john_roberts at sil.org]
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 1:55 PM
To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
Cc: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Lexicog] Pejorative suffixes



Marc Fryd said:

> Is the following an adequate summary of the ongoing discussion?
> a) <-ish> carries a degree of imprecision, or approximation, which
> <-like/ly>,
> for instance, do not convey, expressing rather relative similarity of form
> (like-ness).
> b)"mannish" and "manlike" may equally express negative or positive values,
> in
> accordance with the cultural adequacy of bestowing the quality they convey
> upon
> the recipient in question. However, it is probably the case that
> "imprecision"
> (<-ish>)is more likely to be used in negative contexts and "resemblance"
> (<-like,-ly>) in neutral contexts.


Not quite. Your summary does not take account of the following senses of
"-ish":

Urdang (1982) 1. 'Belonging to': Finnish, Swedish, English
AHD: 1.a. Of the nationality of; for example, Swedish, Finnish.
Ron Moe: 2. n:n. When added to a noun that refers to a citizen of a country,
the resulting noun refers to the language spoken by the citizens
(Swede:Swedish).

Both Urdang and AHD have nationality as a distinctive sense of "-ish" but
not language while Ron has language as a distinctive sense but not
nationality. They are not necessarily the same. British and Scottish
describe nationalities but not languages while Flemish and Kurdish describe
languages but not nationalities. The terms Finnish, Swedish and English just
happen to do both.

John Roberts






Yahoo! Groups Links











Yahoo! Groups Links









------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Has someone you know been affected by illness or disease?
Network for Good is THE place to support health awareness efforts!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/RzSHvD/UOnJAA/79vVAA/HKE4lB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/