Re: Small Derivational Idea

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 1:34 PM, David J. Peterson <dedalvs@...> wrote:
> I was just brushing my teeth this morning, and I looked over
> at my lotion (uh...I mean my wife's lotion, sure...), and noticed
> that it said the following:
>
> Clean
> Greasy Feeling!
>
> That seemed odd to me.  Then, of course, I remembered that
> what it actually said was:
>
> Clean
> Non-Greasy Feeling!
>
> (Un)fortunately, something was covering up the bottle in such
> a way that it was covering up just the "Non-", so all I saw was
> "Greasy Feeling!"  (Oh, I should mention that this is actually
> right-aligned text, so I could still read "Clean".)
>
> This got me to thinking: What if there were a conlang that, for
> whatever reason, had an alphabet not unlike English's (linear)
> and took this seriously?
>
> It occurred that the only way to prevent this would be using an
> infix:
>
> Greasy = "greasy"
> Groneasy = "non-greasy"
On that note, does anyone know how natlangs determine where in a
morpheme an infix may be inserted?

Reply