Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
It is notable for its consistent implementation of the -en suffix. In the '70s and '80s, it was quite common for computer people to use the -en suffix to pluralize computer nouns, such as VAX or box. These would simply become VAXen or boxen, respectively. This practice borrowed the Germanic -en suffix to denote plurals.
Strong verbs took the suffix "-en" and the appropriate stem vowel change for their strong verb class, for example "singan" - "sungen". Wikibooks: Old English/Participles In Middle English, "-en" and "-e" were both used to make the past participle of strong verbs (in other words, "-en" was becoming less common):
Michael Quinion, Ologies and Isms: Word Beginnings and Endings (2003) says that the prefix en- for forming verbs and the suffix -en for forming verbs come from very different sources: en-Also em-. Forming verbs. [French, from Latin in-.] The prefix can be added to nouns, adjectives, and verbs. Em-is a variant used before the the consonants b, m ...
The plural ending -(r)en. Let’s get rid of the plural suffix first, since it is actually quite unrelated to the main question here—it is merely a red herring. The plural ending -en is the outcome of the Old English (OE) ending -an, which was the regular ending in the weak noun declensions
Oftentimes when reading academic texts I will come across the suffix "-ian" as a way to denote ownership. While I find it fitting syntactically (it "feels" right), I don't remember ever learning it specifically in school, etc. For example: Wilsonian (Wilson's) moral diplomacy is widely regarded as a failure.
My gut instinct is that the likelihood of assimilation decreases as the transparency of the en-as a productive, English suffix increases. Enplane and enmesh ‘feel’ much more like productively formed prefixed verbs than envision or enable do.
Note there are a two other, though rarer, suffixes which "ify" the verb: -ate and -en, as in "flourinate" and "blacken" respectively. A quick Google Books search turned up "Word Formation in English" (Cambridge Press) which goes into this in some detail on pp 92-94, and even makes an observation about neologisms tending toward -ize , as OP does.
The suffix -en is an old Inchoative/Causative inflection. It isn't productive any more, however. It isn't productive any more, however. The point is not that -en makes a verb out of whatever it attaches to -- that's incidental and almost irrelevant.
The suffix is an explanation of the first name, not the last. "John Doe Jr." means he is John, the son of John. In a full name listing, the suffix follows the last name because the person is primarily known by is given name and surname, the suffix being a secondary piece of information.
With this the Ger. landgräfin, markgräfin, Du. landgravin, markgravin (the suffix of which is orig. the same as ‑en 2 1), have fallen together in French and in Eng., as landgravine, margravine. The only relationship between ‑ine as a feminine and anything Germanic is the isolated word vixen , where the ‑en was added to make the female fox.