Re: English allative (was:Re: -s adverbs, bodoer Homo Sapiens (was: watered down fiery spirits)
|From:||Andreas Johansson <andjo@...>|
|Date:||Friday, October 24, 2003, 20:11|
Quoting Costentin Cornomorus <elemtilas@...>:
> --- Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> wrote:
> > The below post made me think of an ancient
> > thread (which I'm to lazy to dig up
> > in the archives) about whether _-ward(s)_ could
> > be seen as an allative ending.
> > The consensus was, IIRC, that it wasn't,
> > because the suffix is restricted to a
> > few lexemes.
> For me, any -ward adverb has the ability to
> further add -s. As far as I can tell.
Personlly, I use -ward and -wards interchangeably. But this is perfectly beside
the point, is it not?
> Do you recall what was meant by "restrictive"? I
> can accept it stuck on any noun; though
> admittedly would probably not use it to that
If you mean "restricted", simply that it cannot, in "standard" English*, be
added to any noun. If it in your 'lect _can_** be added to any nouns, I find it
hard to see why it should not be labeled an allative.
* If this leads to a renewed discussion of the exact difference between
_"standard" English_ and _"standard English"_, not to mention _standard
English_ and the corresponding capitalized forms, I'm going to have hard choice
between laughing cynically or weeping desperately.***
** Personally, I'm going to stick to underscores for indicating the level of
emphasis I in properly formatted text would italicize. This leaves open the
possibility of contrasting accentedification with underscoring/italicization.
*** Anyone feeling the urge to suggest that I weep cynically or laugh
desperately can shoot himself****.
**** Or herself, if that suits someone's feministic tastes better*****.
***** As can anyone thinking that I overuse asterisks.