Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/-estь
Latest comment: 10 years ago by CodeCat in topic Category
Category
[edit]I'm not sure if we should have a separate category, as it's the same suffix as *-ostь really. —CodeCat 11:56, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- How is *-estь the same as *-ostь? They differ in one vowel. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 19:14, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- But they're still two variants of the same suffix with the same meaning, and which suffix is chosen depends on the stem before it. So Category:Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-estь is really the same as Category:Proto-Slavic soft-stem words suffixed with *-ostь, isn't it? And I don't think that distinction is really useful if someone just wants to see a quick overview of all words that had this suffix attached to them. —CodeCat 19:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- Two variants = two different suffixes. We make distinction between English/Latin im-/in-/ir-/il- which you can similarly argue to be the same "underlying" prefix, so I don't see why should we make exception with, Slavic -estь/-ostь, -ota/-eta and others. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 19:33, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think the distinctions in the English suffixes are useful either, so I guess we just disagree. :) —CodeCat 19:42, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- Two variants = two different suffixes. We make distinction between English/Latin im-/in-/ir-/il- which you can similarly argue to be the same "underlying" prefix, so I don't see why should we make exception with, Slavic -estь/-ostь, -ota/-eta and others. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 19:33, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- But they're still two variants of the same suffix with the same meaning, and which suffix is chosen depends on the stem before it. So Category:Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-estь is really the same as Category:Proto-Slavic soft-stem words suffixed with *-ostь, isn't it? And I don't think that distinction is really useful if someone just wants to see a quick overview of all words that had this suffix attached to them. —CodeCat 19:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)