- [X]v [Ion]N Suck- Suction, Donate- Donation, Compete- Competition
- [X]n [En]V Soft- Soften, Bright- Brighten, Tight- Tighten
- This would be grammatically incorrect as -ion words cannot transition to an -en word. It already ends in its own suffix. In order to add a suffix to a word to change its word form, it must be in its original form without a suffix already.
Posts
Blog Post #2
1.Verb to Noun
[[x]V ment]N
- Achieve to Achievement
- Argue to Argument
- Judge to Judgement
2.[[X]N,A sion]V
- Discuss to Discussion
- Compress to Compression
- Transfuse to Transfusion
3. The new words would be Achievesion, Argusion, Judgesion.
I don’t feel like the resulting words are not well formed at all, they seem a bit odd. They are also not existing words. I think the reason why it does not work out is because [sion] means “the state of” and it just doesn’t make when it comes to the base words, like Achieve, Argue and Judge.
Blog Post #2
- Verbs to Nouns
-ment, [[X]V er]N
Amaze → amazement
Argue → argument
Abandon → abandonment
- Nouns to Verbs
–ed, [[X]V ed]N
Water → watered
Steam → steamed
Mop → mopped
- Amazement → amazemented
argument→ argumented
abandonment→ abandonmented
Overall, the resulting words in this process were not all well-formed. As you can see in the word amazement, the stem word is amaze, which is a verb. When referring to the action or state of the verb -ment was added, creating a noun which is an already-existing word. As for my other two examples, (argument→ argumented, abandonment→ abandonmented) by adding the suffix (-ed) created a non-existing word because an affix is already present within these words which is (-ment). Thus, allowing the words to not sound well-formed or proper in the English language. To successfully create a well-formed word with added affixes starting with a standard existent word, (stem word) would help allow one to a create a word without it not only sounding unusual but funny looking as well.
Blog Post 2
1.Verb Noun
-ion
[[X] V ion]N
Perfect → Perfection
Invent → Invention
Educate → Education
2.Noun to Verb
-en
[[X]Y en]V where Y=N,A
Dark→ Darken
Fresh→ Freshen
Hard→ Harden
3.Output words in (1) as the inputs in (2)
Clearance→Clearanced
Disturbance→Disturbanced
Balance→Balanced
For the words Clearance→Clearanced and Disturbance→Disturbanced, these words are not well-formed and are not already-existing words. However, with Balance→Balanced, balanced is an already-existing word. Used as, I balanced school and work well (example.) With these words the two affixes are -ance and -ed. So for two words (Clearance→Clearanced & Disturbance→Disturbanced) I noticed that it didn’t make this process work but, for Balance→Balanced it did because we know balanced is an already-existing word.
Post 2 Nicole Villamagna
- Verb as input and noun as output:
[[X]V ment]N
Pay –> Payment, Pave–> Pavement, Amend–>Amendment
- Noun as input and verb as output:
[[X]Y en]V Y=N,V
Straight–>Straighten, Freight–> Frighten, Damp–>Dampen
- Using the output words from #1 as the input for the proves in #2:
[[X]Y en]V Y=N,V
Payment–>Paymenten, Pavement–>Pavementen , Amendment–>Amendmenten.
As you can see, inputting words that already have a suffix into the prosses and therefore adding an additional suffix to the existing words does not result in the formation of other words. This is because I order for the proves to work, the words need to be in their simplest form meaning they can not already have suffixes. Words can not have multiple suffixes at a given time. Some root words may have multiple suffixes that can be used with it, but these suffixes simply cant be added to the root word simultaneously.
Blog Post 2
1.-ion [[x]y ion]n y=v,a
subtract—>subtraction
infect —> infection
possess —> possession
- -ify [[x]n ify] v
simple—> simplify
false—> falsify
class—>classify
3.subtraction—> subtractionify
infection—> infectionify
possession—> possessionify
These outputs do not exist in the English language. They are also not well formed. Having these two suffixes combined negates them. Since the original base of the word is a verb, trying to add another verb ending doesn’t allow the word to be understood. I do not see this process working by taking output from number one as the input for number two.
SDevine Blog Post #2
- Verb as an input; noun as an output
- [[x]V ion]N
- Experiment → Experimentation
- Elect → Election
- Operate → Operation
- Noun as an input; verb as an output
- [[x]Y ify]y=N or A
- Pure → Purify
- Solid → Solidify
- Example → Exemplify
- Outcome
- Experimentationify
- Electionify
- Operationify
- The resulting words (experimentationify and operationify) are not well-formed words and do not exist. In this case the two affixes that I utilized “ion” and “ify” do not work together and result in nonsense words most of the time. These two nonsense words are examples of constraints. They’re considered to be constraints because the ordering of affixes is too complex. However, there are always exceptions. For instance, the word “electionify” utilizes both the “ion” and “ify” affixes and is a valid word. To be honest, I expected all three of these words to be constraints.
Blog Post 2 – Jemima Ventura
- Verb to noun
-or, [[x] v or] n
Govern -governor
Investigate – investigator
Decorate – decorator
2. noun to verb
-fy, [[x] n fy]v
Beauty – beautify
intense -intensify
zombi- zombify
3. governorfy, investigatorfy ,and decoratorfy, the following words do not make sense at all: combining these creates weird combinations of words.
Blog Post 2- Olivia Villafane
- Suffix “ment”: -ment, [[X]V ment]N. Enjoy to enjoyment, manage to management, excite to excitement, etc.
- Suffix “ize”: -ize, [[X]N ize]V. Memory to memorize, apology to apologize, actual to actualize.
- Enjoyment to enjoymentize, management to managmentize, and excitement to excitementize don’t seem to be well formed. This might have to do with the idea that the suffix “ment” is somehow correlated to the meaning of results or processes so it would be difficult formulate verbs from these particular nouns. It is rare to see words with multiple suffixes (at least that I know of) so to there must be some rule or format where you can’t add a suffix to a word that already has a suffix. For this particular instance this seems to be the case, however, I’m curious to see how this plays out with other’s examples. It is easier to find cases of multiple suffixes when it comes to the suffixes being noun affixes. Like the word “accountability” comes to my head. You have the initial word “account”, which is a verb but then you add the suffixes “able” and then after “ity”. These suffixes are both noun affixes so with this in mind, it seems plausible that multiple suffixes are possible as long as they are noun affixes. I can’t find examples where there are multiple verb affixes added to a word.
Blog Post 2
- accept–> acceptance
[[X]V ance]N
[[accept]V ance]N
Judge–> judgment
[[X]V er]N
[[judge]V ment]N
Communicate–> communication
[[X]V er]N
[[communicate]V ation]N
- Friend–> befriend
-be, [be [X]N,A] V
[be [friend] N,A] V
Marry –>marriage
-iage, [[X]N,A iage] V
[[marry]N,A iage] V
Title–> entitle
-en, [en [X]N,A] V
[en [title]NA] V
- accept–> acceptance, friend–>befriend
Beaccept, Befriendance
Judge–> judgement, marry–> marriage
Judgementiage, Marriagement
Communicate–>communication, title–> entitle
Encommunication, Entitlation
When these word from output 1 and output 2 are combined by adding more affixes and suffixes, the words become not real words meaning that they have no further meaning, nor can they be used by people and be easily understood. In every word listed above not once did combining output 1 and output 2 give a word that has a meaning and can be considered well formed, because of this we know that by adding these outputs together it will most likely never work.

