[Lexicog] Pejorative suffixes

Thu Mar 31 01:39:07 UTC 2005

Dear Alkumu:si,

It is very true for Arabic, and in many cases for Hebrew. What is in
Arabic kulayb "little dog" is "klavlav" in Hebrew.
But if we speak about Semitic languages, the suffixes there have more
general meaning, the most common long -i
as suffix for formation of relative adjective -hindi:, (Indian),
andalu:si: - Andalucian, kurdi: - Kurdish, Gurdji: - Georgian,
Farandji: - European; Inglezi - English; rusi - Russian, farsi -
Persian, arabi - Arabic and Arabian, yahu:di: - Jewish; nasrani -
Christian (because Jesus was Nazareth)

Another way to form the adjective in Arabic is to use the participle
form, like Muslim (one who belongs to Islamic religion; lit. one who
submitted himself to God)
One more way is to form an adjective: (A) - (I:) pattern (kabi:r - big,
great), rahi:m (merciful); kari:m (noble); sagi:r (small, young).
There is a parallel for rahi:m - rahma:n (it occurs already in the first
sura of Koran), so -a:n is another suffix. 
I would say that use suffixes for formation of pejorative or endearing
meanings in unproductive in Semitic languages. Those are expressed by
different means.

Pax vobiscum (ma`a as-sala:mi),
Hayim

________________________________

From: mohd hans [mailto:muhammadmh2002 at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 7:57 AM
To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Lexicog] Pejorative suffixes

Dear Lexicolish,
I would like to draw your attention to the facts you all know that
semantic changes and shift are language-universalish.  In Arabic
deminutives appear as infixes or in other forms, and they are, like most
languages, productive.   From a diminutive usage either an
> endearing or a pejorative term can develop, depending on the context
or that particular use in some situations.Thus, /kalb/ "a dog" is used
as a name of a person "kulayb". In some dialects of Arabic this name can
be looked as a pejorative term whereas in other dialects it's a term of
endearment.
Thank you for your contributions
Muhammad 
>

"Dr. Hayim Y. Sheynin" <hsheynin at gratz.edu> wrote:
	I encountered another recent -ish adjective New Yorkish, e.g.
see
	The following title:
	      New Yorkish : and Other American Yiddish stories /
selected and
	translated by Max Rosenfeld.  Philadelphia : Sholom Aleichem
Club Press
	; [Southfield] : Congress of Secular Jewish Organizations,
c1995. 

	In general suffixes -ish and -ich are more productive in Jewish
American
	Speech, most probably under the influence of Yiddish which is
carring
	these
	Germanic suffixes, but as far as I know they do not have a
pejorative
	meaning. Since the Jews use 'goyim' instead 'Gentiles' to
distinguish
	between Jews and non-Jews, the adjective goyish was coined, but
I do not
	know on what stage it was coined, maybe still in Yiddish and
only
	afterwards was used in American English.   

	Best wishes,
	Hayim

	-----Original Message-----
	From: Peter Kirk [mailto:peterkirk at qaya.org] 
	Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 12:34 PM
	To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
	Subject: Re: [Lexicog] Pejorative suffixes

	On 26/03/2005 16:10, David Tuggy wrote:

	>**Comments from David Tuggy below**
	>  
	>

	Thank you, David. Just one further comment:

	>  
	>
	>... I find it interesting 
	>that the nationality/language sense, though extensively
exemplified, is

	>not productive, in comparison with the -ese or especially the
-an 
	>suffixes with those meanings. The only -ish formation of this
type that

	>I know of being coined in my lifetime is "Yerkish", the
language taught

	>to chimpanzees at Yerkes, which was likely calqued on
"Turkish".**
	>
	>  
	>
	Well, there is "Biblish", which has been extensively used on
another 
	list which you and I are on. But this is perhaps not so much
Bible+-ish 
	as a compound of Bible and English. But I would agree that -ish
for 
	languages and peoples is no longer productive, having had its
day 
	probably in the 19th century when it was used more widely than
today. 
	"Canaanitish" and "Israelitish" were both used in the 19th
century, but 
	then both are in the King James Bible.

	But what about Elvish, Dunlendish, Orkish, and (as languages)
Mannish 
	and Dwarfish? These are 20th century coinages, all in The Lord
of the 
	Rings (most in Appendix F), although maybe before your lifetime!

	-- 
	Peter Kirk
	peter at qaya.org (personal)
	peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
	http://www.qaya.org/

	-- 
	No virus found in this outgoing message.
	Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
	Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.3 - Release Date:
25/03/2005

	Yahoo! Groups Links

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129hibkmm/M=298184.6018725.7038619.3001176/
D=groups/S=1709195911:HM/EXP=1112273844/A=2593423/R=0/SIG=11el9gslf/*htt
p:/www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60190075> 

<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.6018725.7038619.3001176/D=group
s/S=:HM/A=2593423/rand=614735570> 

________________________________

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
<mailto:lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe
> 

*	Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> . 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lexicography/attachments/20050330/dc6fa882/attachment.htm>