Talk:-ogony
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Metaknowledge in topic RFD discussion: March–June 2018
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
Useless; we can use the -o- interfix + -gony when necessary. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 10:06, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
A {{suffixsee}} test doesn't reveal any entries using it. I think it can be deleted. DonnanZ (talk) 12:07, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
- This reminds me of a discussion on de.Wikt about whether the verb suffix -ieren should have an entry, or just be considered -ier + -en. (de.Wikt decided "no", we've so far decided "yes" in that partcular case.) I wonder if it would be useful to make this into a hard or soft redirect to "-gony". I only see an underwhelming two books mentioning it as a suffix, both by a Helen Buss Mitchell. - -sche (discuss) 20:30, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
- @-sche: I personally think we aren't segmenting enough, and give a wrong picture of the variety of derivational processes. Does English really have 700 different suffixes?
- For instance, I'm not fond of "semantic" suffixes (things like -κλῆς (-klês)), and think we should stick as much as possible to grammatical/morphological suffixes (which serve to switch from one POS to another, basically); we should make heavier use of composition instead. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 12:22, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
- Delete or redirect to -gony. - -sche (discuss) 18:02, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 03:44, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- RFD failed and redirected accordingly. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:57, 25 June 2018 (UTC)