Appendix talk:Latin suffixes

As with the Latin prefixes page, this is an attempt to translate the entire contents of the English suffixes page.

This is not the way to go about creating this page, as it results in nonsensical suffixes such as "-athonis" (the Romans did not have walkathons and the like, or if they did, this isn't what how they described them).

It would be better to start with a blank page and add known Latin suffixes (that is, suffixes used in Latin, not English suffixes with Latin origins). To this end, I have commented everything out for the time being. Please restore and add genuine Latin suffixes to the page. -- Paul G 16:56, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

RFDO discussion: January 2014–June 2015

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

Appendix:Latin suffixes

This doesn't add anything beyond Category:Latin suffixes. —CodeCat 18:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Not correct. It shows that there are some Latin inflectional endings that we have and some that we lack.

• Keep or use before deleting. If we delete all of the Latin inflectional endings, then we should probably use use to start the Latin inflectional endings appendix. DCDuring TALK 19:30, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• Inflectional endings aren't suffixes, though, and shouldn't be in either this Appendix or the identically named Category. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Keep, though it needs a lot of work. Many Latin suffixes have extended forms (e.g. -lus → -ulus → -culus → -unculus); such an appendix could explain such proliferation. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 21:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

• Kept, no consensus to delete. Also, it is a good page. --Type56op9 (talk) 23:02, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

RFD discussion: May 2017–August 2018

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

Appendix:Latin suffixes

A lot of these are inflectional endings, not suffixes; some of them are connecting forms of suffixes that we don't lemmatise that way. But there's no reason to clean this up, because if we did, it would be a perfect copy of Category:Latin suffixes. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:47, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

There are different types of suffixes: derivational suffixes (e.g. diminutive suffixes) and inflectional suffixes (declensional or conjugational suffixes) - although it could depend on the terminology.
The page could give some information behind each suffix like "* -bamus (conjugational suffix for first person plural indicative imperfect active)" and/or put it in sections like:

== Derivational Suffixes ==

=== Diminutive Suffixes ====

...

== Inflentional Suffixes ===

=== Declensional suffixes ====

=== Conjugational suffixes ====

With further information it wouldn't be a copy of the category.

BTW: This failed RFDO before as seen on Appendix talk:Latin suffixes.

-84.161.22.3 03:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Delete. --Barytonesis (talk) 20:07, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

• RFDO failed. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)