Cadfaell

op-

Is there such a prefix in English? All the internal links are for other languages (Dutch, Maltese and Serbo-Croatian). --Mglovesfun (talk) 17:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I think, it isn't a good idea to put a word like 'opprobrium' to the words with prefix ob- (but in the moment it is set in none prefix categorie). 'ob-' is the Latin prefix for this word in Latin. In English the consonant 'b' has changed to 'p', so we have an English prefix 'op-'. We should not suppress the linguistic development between 'ob' and 'op-'.

I don't see a 'b' in the prefix part of the word "oppbrobrium", so I mean it is wrong to set it in an English prefix categorie 'ob-'. Here we assess the English word, not the Latin history of this word or the Latin word. The history of the prefix 'op-' we should declare in the article op- and ob-. -- Cadfaell 18:24, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

But the English isn't from op- + probium, it's directly from Latin. By way of analogy, jeté isn't from English jeter + -é, it's from French jeté. --Mglovesfun (talk) 18:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, when the Latin language already has given us a word with the prefix 'op', which we have taken over, just I see non reason to put it to the 'ob-'categoriy . The changing from 'öb-' to 'op-' is Latin language development and Latin language history and has nothing to do with the level of English language. When the English have bought a word opprobrium in Rome and have put it in their dictionary, so they have a word with a prefix 'op'. Nobody with best eyes or good glasses can find a 'b' in this word (here only in the prefix part). I really see no reason, to change the prefix of a English word, because it has had a prefix changing in Latin times or by Latin language rules. The Latin prefix ad- wit many changings to ac- at- and mor is similar. For every prefix we have an own categroy. We dont throw all akin prefixes in obe pot. ---