Backformation is the reverse of adding an affix (i.e prefix or suffix) to a word (or if we’re not just talking about English, doing any kind of derivational operation on a word, whether it’s affixing, or repeating a portion of the word, or changing the vowels, etc.) ❋ Unknown (2004)
The - ly suffix (meaning “like”, by the way, and derived from an Old English word meaning “corpse” – cool, no?) is a late-comer to English derivational suffixes, replacing the now purely phonetic final e (used to mean “adverb”, now means “long preceding vowel”). ❋ Unknown (2009)
The same root *sub- appears to be present as in Etruscan and Egyptian and we even may be seeing an Aegean derivational suffix *-na attached. ❋ Unknown (2010)
Even, say, including the derivational and conjugational endings as entries in the dictionary would be, really, really handy. ❋ Unknown (2010)
It would literally have meant '(Town of) flowing waters', from *rūmōn 'river; flowing water', a securely Indo-European formation built on the root *reu- 'to flow, to run (as of liquid)' and the derivational suffix *-mo-. ❋ Unknown (2010)
Kenneth Schaffner used and developed Ernst Nagel's (1961) analysis of derivational theory reduction to argue for the reduction of classical Mendelian genetics (T2) to molecular biology (T1) and refined it over many years ❋ Darden, Lindley (2009)
Waters thus defended “informal reduction,” in which molecular models of crossing-over between homologous chromosomes were shown to be explanatory, even though no derivational reduction was involved. ❋ Darden, Lindley (2009)
In summary, philosophers of biology agree that the relations between Mendelian genetics and molecular biology are not appropriately analyzed via derivational intertheoretic reduction. ❋ Darden, Lindley (2009)
This mechanistic analysis better captured, she claimed, the practice of biologists, with their frequent talk of mechanisms, than the analyses of the relations between the fields in terms of formal derivational theory reduction, informal reduction, replacement, related investigative strategies, and explanatory extension via expanded argument schemata. ❋ Darden, Lindley (2009)
The apparent etymology gives us no clue either since if this is a native word, it would divide into ar 'to lift up' and -aχ, a derivational suffix with a patientive meaning. ❋ Unknown (2008)
Others may be related to derivational morphology the method of creating a new word from an old word by adding an affix; e.g., happy - happiness, employ - employee. ❋ Josh (2008)
It sure is a tempting etymology though but it's messier than attributing it to the attested verb ar plus derivational -ax. ❋ Unknown (2008)
The use of -na as a derivational suffix is characteristically Etruscoid but Baldi dismayingly tries to give us a Latin etymology by what is in effect a whim without carefully explaining the disparity in its phonetics and without expounding on the morphology exhibited in these words that, as I've already shown, is more Etruscan-like in nature than Latin-like. ❋ Unknown (2008)
In the minimalist framework, lexicon has the numeration set, which comprises the lexical categories, functional categories and the inflectional and derivational suffixes. ❋ Kesav (2008)
So then, if -cva is the normal suffix used after sibilants as well as aspirate stops like θ, this makes me wonder if heramaśva found in the Pyrgi Tablets is really a plural or merely a singular noun that looks like a plural but which terminates instead in a different derivational suffix altogether, namely -śva. ❋ Unknown (2008)
For example, the Etruscan derivational suffix -aχ appears to have been in origin *-aku. ❋ Unknown (2008)
