20
Word for a specific way we noun our verbs? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/33025461

I'm doing some conlanging for a book and I'm having trouble finding the word for how we can take a verb, add -er at the end, and get a word for a person who does that thing. For example, a driver is someone who drives, a commander is someone who commands, a lawyer is someone who laws, and a finger is someone who fings. I am having trouble finding out how other languages noun their verbs in this way since I don't know what this thing is called. Pls halp.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago

Romance languages are really messy in this aspect, and there are multiple competing suffixes:

  • -dor; see amar→amador, hablar→hablador(a). The OG agentive nominaliser, in Latin it was -tor/-tōrem. Eventually it got a feminine version, as Spanish -dora.
  • -triz; the original feminine of the above, from Latin -trix/-trīcem. I think it isn't productive any more.
  • -nte; see amar→amante, hablar→hablante. From Latin present active participles, like -āns/-antem. Originally it was a way to handle the verb as an agent adjective, and more conservative grammars still describe it only like this, but neither Latin nor the Romance languages care too much about the distinction between noun and adjective, so... so yeah.
  • -ero/-era, the one you listed. From Latin -ārius/-ārium, -āria/-āriam, -ārium/-ārium. Originally it formed nouns from adjectives, and rarely from other nouns (X-arium = "where you keep X"). People started spamming it in other parts of speech.

I listed them as in Spanish but in the others it's the same deal. And the confusing part is that there's always some subtle semantic distinction; for example an hablador is someone who's talkative, but an hablante is whoever is speaking.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

@lvxferre @Nemo so how is the distinction from the last paragraph communicated in a supposedly non-messy language?

[-] [email protected] 7 points 3 weeks ago

If you find a non-messy language, let me know.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago

I see two ways to do so:

  1. Have multiple agent noun affixes, each for a type of agent. For example I feel like Spanish -dor is more often used for someone who's repeatedly doing something, while -nte is someone doing it now.
  2. Apply the affix not to the base form of the verb, but to a conjugated form, in a way that preserves tense/aspect/mood information.

So, as an example of #2. Let's say your conlang has the verb "lug" (to do), and here's part of its conjugation:

  • indicative perfect past - lugene (they did)
  • indicative imperfect past - lugavo (they were doing)
  • indicative habitual present - lugien (they often do, they typically do)
  • indicative progressive present - lug (they're currently doing)
  • [etc.]

And your agent suffix is, dunno, -bor. Most languages would apply it into the base form and call it a day, so you'd get "lugbor"; you could instead do something like

  • lugenebor - the one who did
  • lugavobor - the one who used to do
  • lugienbor - the one who often does; like Spanish "hablador" (one who talks often = talkative)
  • lugbor - the one actively doing it; like Spanish "hablante" (one who's talking now = speaker)
  • etc.

I feel this would go well with an agglutinative language. Just make sure the distinction between adjective and noun is clear, otherwise your conspeakers will conflate the nominalising and adjectivising suffixes.

this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2025
20 points (100.0% liked)

Linguistics

1292 readers
16 users here now

Welcome to the community about the science of human Language!

Everyone is welcome here: from laypeople to professionals, Historical linguists to discourse analysts, structuralists to generativists.

Rules:

  1. Instance rules apply.
  2. Be reasonable, constructive, and conductive to discussion.
  3. Stay on-topic, specially for more divisive subjects. And avoid unnecessary mentioning topics and individuals prone to derail the discussion.
  4. Post sources when reasonable to do so. And when sharing links to paywalled content, provide either a short summary of the content or a freely accessible archive link.
  5. Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
  6. Have fun!

Related communities:

Resources:

Grammar Watch - contains descriptions of the grammars of multiple languages, from the whole world.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]