Re: THEORY: Evolution of infixes/ablaut?

Nik Taylor wrote:

> Eric Christopherson wrote:
> > Anyway, I don't know. It just seems to me like a morpheme would be
> > fundamental and atomic, even though obviously the converse has been
> > demonstrated.
>
> It usually is - infixes are pretty rare.  In fact, I think that the
> expletive-infixation is caused by the secondary stressings "absolutely"
> sounds like two words to many people "abso lutely".  Besides, bound
> morphemes usually evolve from free words,
Or the other way around:  just the other day I saw a car dealership which
specialized in "pre owned" cars.  It could have been a typo on the sign, but
it was quite big, and I would have noticed it if "pre-owned" were meant.
But then, that's me. <sigh>

===========================================
Tom Wier <artabanos@...>
"Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."
===========================================