|
|
In article <1156877767.835269.254560@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Nathan Sanders wrote:
> > In article <4lj1vkF258ckU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.removethis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > In your example, "Wag" would be the root (and perhaps a zero-derived
> > > > stem, if inflectional affixes can be added to it alone), while "Wagen"
> > > > is a stem.
> > >
> > > But "en" in "Wagen" isn't an affix. The fact that it reduces to "n" in
> > > "Wagner" isn't different from the "y" in "city" changing to "ie" in
> > > "cities", and the "y" certainly isn't an affix.
> >
> > Oops, sorry, I completely misunderstood your example. In that case,
> > "Wag(e)n" is both a root and a suffix. "Wag" is nothing, unless is
> > appears in another word without "(e)n".
>
> Both a root and a stem.
Dangit, yep. An unfortunate thinko there.
> You've left "base" out!
True.
Nathan
--
Nathan Sanders
Linguistics Program
Williams College
http://wso.williams.edu/~nsanders/
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from www.teranews.com">http://www.teranews.com
|
|