The Analyses—proving there is NO suffix <*-tion>

The 5 detectives in the team (and their family and friends) took responsibility for sections of the document and went through the following process:

Step 1: Preliminary Sorting Out of Word Families

The 1200+ words were sorted into families to reduce the number of duplicate analyses. This meant that the detectives needed to hypothesis as to what the base element was and locate all other words in the list that might use this base element. They needed to verify that the meaning of the words did indeed have a common link and if they were unsure they needed to check the denotation in the dictionary. Before long the detectives started coming up with base elements with similar spellings but with different meanings and so determined that they may have originated from different roots. This presented the need to do a diachronic etymological analysis to prove this, something that was a little challenging for some of our Word Detectives. This step reduced our list to around 700 groups.

Step 2: Base or Stem + <-ion> suffix

The detectives needed to see how many stems obviously took the suffix <-ion>. There were many of these and the team was told that they didn’t need to analyse any further than the first example if they knew what the word meant and were able to demonstrate from their word sum that the suffix was <-ion>.

Several of the detectives decided to analyse the denotation anyway as a double check or for words they didn’t know the meaning of and when they did so this was included.

Step 3: Base or Stem with suffix <-ate> + <ion>

During step 2, many bases or stems were identified that obviously took both the suffix <-ate> and the suffix <-ion>. These were separated into their own list and validated to ensure that the stem with the suffix <-ate> was an attested word. We discovered that there were a number that were not.

Step 4: Base with combined suffixes <-ation> / <-ition>

When some of the detectives came across a base or stem which obviously took both the suffixes <-ate> and <ion> but would not work with just the <-ate> suffix,, they had to do a little research into the combined suffixes <-ation> and <-ition> and how they worked. In these words the suffix elements <-ate> and <-ion> had combined before the word came into English usage and had not always been separated. (Note: When this separation did take place, it created what is termed a back formation.) It was necessary therefore to remove the combined suffix to find the base element. This provided a teaching opportunity for us all and an introduction to combined suffixes.
(see our NOTE on The Combined Suffixes <-ation> and <-ition>)

Step 5: Base using combined elements <-fication>

As the detectives came across words using this new suffix combination, they needed to analyse a little deeper than with other words. This step needed a greater understanding of the structure of the words and how to use what they knew to find out what they didn’t know.

Andrés was the first to come across this combination with his analysis of the word <desertification>. It has provided an excellent teaching opportunity which will make the learning that much more relevant. Understanding how the Latin root < fac(ere) > has influenced English assists children in easily determining the denotation of a word by immediately knowing it has to do with “making or doing”. Andrés’s definition of <desertification> after he had learned about this combination was “the process of making a desert”. His brother Francisco first came across this combination with his analysis of <specification>. With this word he needed to determine whether the letter <-i-> after <spec> was a connecting vowel or part of the base. His analysis concluded the latter—<speci> — and also that the stem of <specification> →  <specific> is a Latin compound word.

Allegra’s first experience of an English base from this root, was with her analysis of <faction>. She was able to identify all the related family words using this base, but knew also that the first element was not a prefix. Her analysis also revealed a type of compound. That was all Allegra needed to know to understand how the words were built. Allegra next came across the Latin root < fac(ere) > when she was analysing the word <perfection>, check out her analysis.

Step 6: Base taking the combined suffixes <-ize>, <-ate> and <-ion>

Approaching the end of our analyses, several detectives discovered a combination of three suffixes <-ize/> + <-ate/> + <-ion>. Collecting this group together provided an excellent opportunity to discuss the function of different suffixes and how they help us use words in different ways. For example, Francisco’s <speci> base also provides us with the adjective <special> when we add the suffix <-al>. If we also add the suffix <-ize> (or <-ise> depending on what English you use), we have the verb form of the word <specialize>.  and when we add the combined suffix <-ation> we get <specialization> ’the state of being specialized’. We grouped these words together to see if this pattern applied to them all. And this has started us off on our latest research topic.

Step 7: The Ones Needing Detailed Analysis

All the detectives discovered words that don’t seem to have other family members in English. Many of these are not in common use or their meanings and/or base elements are not obvious from their spelling. We tagged these with a question mark (?abrogation) to mark as words that needed a more detailed analysis. As we investigated many of these we were able to move them into one of the other groups. In the end we had only a handful of words left. These all needed to be investigated fully and have formed the basis for many an ongoing word study.

What is uploaded at present is the current state of the compilation of our study results.

1) If the base element has been identified, it is underlined or has been listed beneath the analysis.

2) If other related words have been identified from the synchronic etymology of the word then these are included as Related words.

3) If discovered during the analysis the diachronic etymology will be included or a summary of the denotation of the word.

The Process

NOTES to Understanding Our Analysis:

4) If the study was done independently, the name of the word detective responsible for the analysis is in parentheses.

5) If there were any problems with the analysis, these are recorded as a NOTE at the end of the analysis. Some Notes will refer you to the following information on <-ion>.

6) And finally, if utilized a resource from the Real Spelling Toolkit, or any of the Anthologies, then that has been included as well.

The Combined Suffixes <-ation> and <-ition>

Theme F of Kit 4 from the Real Spelling Toolbox by Melvyn Ramsden on “The suffixes <-ion>, <-ian> and <-ity>” explains about the combinations of <-ion> and lists two combined forms which contain the suffix. Here are some word sums to illustrate how these work.

<-ation> → <-ate + ion> : conversation → converse + (ate + ion)  → converse + ation

Because there is no word <*conversate> we must use the combined suffix <-ation>

<-ition> → <-ite + ion>: addition → add + (ite + ion)  → add + ition

Again, because there is no word <*addite> we need to use the combined suffix <-ition>.

The Combined Elements <-fication>

Melvyn Ramsden also gives an explanation on the origin of these combinations formed from the base < fic > and the suffixes <-ate> and <-ion> in his eGroup Anthology Vol 2. The following is an edited excerpt of his explanation as it pertains to our study.

The Latin root < fic > as a variant of < fac(ere) >. This has given us two English base elements: < fice / fy >.  

The base < fic > is used finally in compounds to make adjectives like < horrific >.

The base < fice > when stressed forms verbs like < suffice >, or unstressed forms nouns like < artifice > and < office >.

You will see that in < horrific > there is an < i > before < fic >: this is a connecting vowel.  In fact, this combination of < i + fic > is so frequent that it “feels” as if it is a suffix.

The Latin root < fic > has also given the English base < fy >: this is used as the second element of compounds to form verbs. Again, < fy > usually has the connecting vowel <-i-> before it, just like < fic >.

Even though we are told and often it may feel like this is a suffix, we know about its real identity as the base < fy > with a connecting vowel because there are a few words that use it with a different, much rarer, connecting vowel: <-e-> in words such as :

stupefy    putrefy    petrify

Again, < i + fy > and < e + fy > “feel” like suffixes even though, strictly speaking they are actually ‘connecting vowel’ + ‘base’.

There is another base element that has come into English from the Latin < fac(ere) > and that is < fact >.  We know it is a base because of words like < faction → fact + ion> and we can see it replace the base < fy > in our example words:

stupefaction   putrefaction   petrifaction

Therefore any words in our analysis that use the element <-fication> such as < mystification> are types of compounds and can be analysed as follows:

myst + i + fic + ate/ + ion

You can find out more about the work of Melvyn Ramsden and Real Spelling at: www.realspelling.com

Portmanteau Words

Humpty Dumpty does an excellent job of describing a portmanteau word to Alice in Lewis Carroll’s ‘Through the Looking Glass’ when he is explaining the meaning of the words in the poem ’Jabberwocky’. This is what he has to say about it:

“Well, ‘slithy’ means ‘lithe and slimy’. ‘Lithe’ is the same as ‘active’. You see it’s a portmanteau—there are two meanings packed up into one word.”

Our detectives discovered that just when they were considering that there might be a situation when <*tion> was being used as a suffix, they needed to consider an occurrence that happens more frequently than one might think; the merging of two words into one—the portmanteau word.

Any words that were discovered to be a portmanteau are labeled as such.

The following is the analysis work from our research to prove once and for all that:

there is NO suffix <*-tion > ,

the suffix is <-ion> because the <t> always belongs to the base or stem

 

Our project started the week of June 6, 2006 and while most of the analysis work was completed before Christmas, it was not until February 2007 that all the results from the analyses were finally compiled and ready for presentation. Even then we were still finding new words to add to our various groups. We discovered that there is no way of ensuring we have covered every eventuality of the use of the suffix <-ion>, but we are satisfied that we have analysed sufficient words to prove beyond a doubt that there is no suffix <*-tion>.