Re: Fruitful typos (was: Vulgar Latin)

BP Jonsson wrote:

> In most Germanic languages -- English being the possible exception --, and
> in Italian/Spanish/Portuguese too, adjectives derived from placenames and
> nouns designating dialects/people of places are very productive categories;
> they can and are often created "on the fly".
English is no exception: for any placename, I can derive an adjective and a
noun (usually identical in form) using one of a number of suffixes: -an, -er,
-ist, -ite.  The only question is which suffix to use in particular cases:
-ite is the most universal, but it also has the meaning "adherent of", so
it is avoided in some cases: "Chomskyan" means "pertaining to Chomsky", but
"Chomskyite" means "blind follower of Chomsky", to cite an example that
has come up on this list.

A few place names resist this tendency:  Independence (Mo.), Walla Walla
(Wash.) have been mentioned as having no associated appellations.
Some places have idiosyncratic forms:  Cambridge (Mass.) uses "Cantabrigian",
tracking its English correspondent; Michigan uses "Michigander".

> Apparently the same is true
> of at least Russian among the Slavic languages.  In fact it is somewhat
> surprising to me, but not strange, that French differs from SAE in this
> respect.
Formal written standard French seems to resist coining in general, even
in accord with what seem to be productive patterns.

--

Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis vom dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@...>
Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau,  || http://www.reutershealth.com
Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau,           || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Und trank die Milch vom Paradies.            -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)