# affectionate affixes, deformation of proper names



## ThomasK

I have been wondering about affixes in Dutch, that are used to express affection. I mean: we have the affixes called diminutives (in Dutch _Bart-je,_ in Flemish also _Paul-_*ke,* like the German _Gret-chen _oder_ Häns-_el (etc.). In English it does not exist as such, I think, but the same is expressed by short forms (Robert/ Bob, Edward/ Ted, ...), sometimes followed by -y. 

That reminds me of a phenomenon we have/ had in our dialect here: boys' names were followed by -ie, in colloquial language. That looked like an insult to some, but I think it basically betrayed affection or at least a distinct feeling of recognition as someone special (be it neg. or pos.). 

[Other things referrring to affection (or recognition) could be adding a definite article or determiner (as in former (Belgian) Brabant, I think): 'den Ben', like the German 'der Karl'. But maybe we ought to focus on real 'alterations' of names]

So I thought that *changing (or 'doing something to') proper names is some kind of universal token of affection - by 'particularizing' a particular (loved - or hated ?) person's name*. (I think I recognize that 'urge' with me...) Do you recognize that in your language ? Or is my hypothesis falsified rightaway ?

But the ie-phenomenon did not turn up with girls names, I think.


----------



## Saluton

Perhaps you're right. We have a lot of such suffixes in Russian: -чка (-chka, for both genders), -ик, -чик (-ik, -chik, only for boys), -нька (-nka, mostly for girls), -иша, -уша (-isha, -usha, for both genders). The first three are used as diminutive suffixes for common nouns as well...


----------



## ThomasK

Thanks for the information, but it would be more interesting even if one or more of those suffixes or affixes were not dimininutives. The Flemish -ie for example is not a diminutive, I think - or must be consider the English suffix -y in _Teddy, Bobby,_ a suffix ? I don' think so. Can anyone shed a light on it ? (In English there is only have _little_, I think, as in _little boy,_ a lexical but not a synthetic _(?) diminutive_...)


----------



## Nizo

I'm not sure how common it is in other languages, but *Esperanto* does have “affectionate” affixes that are not diminutive. The masculine affix is _*-*__*ĉ*__*j-*_ and the feminine is _*-nj-*_. These can be used with common nouns or with personal names. See the following examples:


_*frato (brother) > fraĉjo (bro)*_
_*fratino (sister) > franjo (sis)*_
_*patro (father) > paĉjo (dad, papa)*_
_*patrino (mother) > panjo (mom, mum, mama)*_
_*onklo (uncle) > oĉjo (unc)*_
_*avino (grandmother) > avinjo (grandma)*_
_*onklino (aunt) > onjo*_
_*Petro > Peĉjo*_
_*Vilhelmo > Vilĉjo*_
_*Johano > Joĉjo*_
_*Mario > Manjo*_
_*Sofio > Sonjo*_


They're placed at the end of a word, but there is no rule as to what precedes them; this is based on sound and personal preference. 


In contrast, the diminutive affix is _*-et-*_. Which is usually used with common nouns, adjectives, and verbs. It can be considered affectionate as well.


_*frato (brother) > frateto (little brother, younger brother)*_
_*avino (grandmother) > avineto (granny, little old woman)*_
_*urbo (city) > urbeto (town)*_
_*domo (house) > dometo (little house)*_
_*blua (blue) > blueta (bluish)*_
_*fali (to fall) > faleti (to stumble)*_


----------



## ThomasK

The _-et-_ is not so convincing to me; it looks like an extra suffix, very much like a diminutive. 

The others are interesting indeed. Strangely enough, they have been 'invented' so to speak, whereas the West-european languages I know do not have 'definite', 'clear-cut' affective affixes besides diminutives, or so I think.


----------



## Nizo

ThomasK said:


> The _-et-_ is not so convincing to me; it looks like an extra suffix, very much like a diminutive.


 
You're correct:  the* -et*- in Esperanto is a diminutive affix. I mentioned that above.  It can be used affectionately, but it is primarily a diminutive affix.


----------



## ThomasK

Of course those are nicknames. Or 'expressive' names. I discovered fragments of *Semantics, Culture, and Cognition: Universal Human Concepts in Culture ...*
(Anna Wierzbicka)
where 10 kinds of expressive variations ('deformations') are listed in Russian.

And those are not diminutives, it seems to me...


----------



## Kangy

Spanish has many of them, which vary according to the region/country, and even many speakers invent their own! 

We generally use the diminutive when we want to convey an affectionate meaning. The most common diminutive suffix is -ito/-ita, followed by -illo/-illa, -ín/-ina, -ico/-ica, etc...

casa (house) - casita
café (coffee) - cafecito
perro (dog) - perrito
hermano (brother) - hermanito
Carlos - Carlitos
Juana - Juanita

And so on...


----------



## ThomasK

Now that would be interesting: to hear about the 'idiosyncratic' expressive variations - and to see along what lines native speakers in your country are creative without using 'clear-cut' diminutives (as now you are giving examples of diminutives). 

So could you give some original expressive variants (Argentinian, Spanish, ...) ? 

_I suppose we shall end up finding out that we 'particularise' proper names *in all kinds of ways*, if we consider someone very 'particular' or special to us... _


----------



## Encolpius

Personally I think it exists in most European languages. It would be interesting to find out if it also exists in non-European languages (Japanes, Chinese). 
As for Hungarian we have *-i, -ka/-ke *and many others. And we also can use definitve articles in front of personal names giving them some affection. 

Károly (Charles) - Karcsi - Karcsika
Pál (Paul) - Pali - Palika
Mária - Mari - Marika - Mariska
Erzsébet (Elisabeth) - Bözsi - Erzsi - Erzsike


----------



## ThomasK

Yes, quite an interesting topic. But how can we get a Japanese or Chinese here ? ;-)


----------



## Kanes

In Bulgarian, for a man, you put a femminen affix 'ka', for a woman you put neutral one.


----------



## ThomasK

Interesting addition: 'feminizing' suffixes for men, next to diminutives and other suffixes or changes... But then : does the so-called neutral affix have a meaning, Kanes ? Is it a diminutive ?


----------



## Encolpius

Since feminizing suffixes are common in Slavic languages I can make some comments. They don't have any meaning. But feminizing suffixes are common also in other languages and I bet even in Dutch. 
Czech also uses those feminizing suffixes (-ka, -kyně, etc.)
teacher = učitel - učitel*ka*
doctor = lékař - lékař*ka*
chairman = předseda - předsed*kyně*

I'm not sure about the Dutch feminizing suffixes but you might know the German: Arzt - Ärztin, Lehrer - Lehrerin, Freund - Freundin. Does this not exist in Dutch??

& maybe you'll find it interesting but some languages (Slavic, Italian) use *the opposite of diminutives* (I have no idea what they call it) and it makes a bigger meaning out the original word.


----------



## ThomasK

Good Lord, you're right. Of course there are feminine suffixes, but i had not associated them with affection, that is the point. Are you implying that you use them in your language with an affectionate meaning ? (We can only use diminutives with that effect) 

Is 'augmentatives' the right word ? But I have never heard of such *suffixes*. How interesting ! (So far I cannot imagine we have them in Dutch or other Germanic languages, but I am not an expert. I did find the word with that meaning at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augmentative. I see prefixes - or separate words - mentioned, but that is not so special... Of course Latin -ose would be some kind of augmentative, but to me it is not because it derives an adjective from a noun, not from another adjective...) But do augmentatives have a positive (!) affectionate connotation in Slavic languages ?


----------



## nichec

ThomasK said:


> Yes, quite an interesting topic. But how can we get a Japanese or Chinese here ? ;-)


 
Hmm, I don't think this exists in Chinese, or if it does, then I am not aware of it.


----------



## Encolpius

But maybe it exists in Japanese.


----------



## Outsider

This is common in Portuguese: Pedro --> Pedr*ito*, Joana --> Joan*inha*, etc.

Usage is like in Spanish.


----------



## sound shift

In my father's native East Kent, "old" was used as an affectionate "prefix": "old Cath", "old Bert", etc., irrespective of the person's age.


----------



## ThomasK

Even 'old' then... Yes, I can imagine something the like in Dutch: _ouwe_, implying something like 'It is like we have known each other for years'... 

Well, find a Japanese, Encolpius ! I might try to myself !


----------



## Encolpius

According to the internet:

-_chan and -kun are two diminutives that are commonly used for people. -chan is used with girls, and -kun with boys. So, for example, a boy named Akihiro would frequently be called Akihiro-kun by his parents or other elders. A girl named Emiko would be Emiko-chan.

This continues even into adulthood, especially in informal settings. Older man may refer to male subordinates, like in an office, as -kun.

Meanwhile, these can also be used with animals and such. "Neko" means "cat," but "neko-chan" essentially means "cute little cat."
_


----------



## Hiro Sasaki

nichec said:


> Hmm, I don't think this exists in Chinese, or if it does, then I am not aware of it.


I think that 小姐 is a kind of diminutive which express affection in Chinese. I don't speak chinese.

"My little" is a kind of diminutive.

In Japanese, Juanito is Juan chan. But, "chan" does not have
any connotation of smallness. 

Hiro Sasaki


----------



## ThomasK

But I do understand it has an affectionate connotation, Hiro - or ... ? 

I know about the -san (in popular movies), which was something like 'Mr', I thought, in English. Or ??? Is there more that can be said about the meaning of 'chan/ chun' ?


----------



## Hiro Sasaki

“Chan” is used for children and girls. It’s an affix which expresses affection but it can not be called “diminutive”, because  it does not express “smallness” . It’s only an affix without any particular meaning.

Hiro Sasaki​


----------



## ThomasK

Thanks, Hiro. One is tempted of course to link children and 'smallness'...


----------



## nichec

Hiro Sasaki said:


> I think that 小姐 is a kind of diminutive which express affection in Chinese. I don't speak chinese.


In my experience, you only call someone 小姐 when you don't know that person at all, it's extremely polite, I would only expect people working in the banks or such to call me 小姐, if someone I know calls me that, I would take it as a joke.


----------



## Hiro Sasaki

I did not know is so polite. It’s the same with
Spanish.  They do not use “señorita” ( little lady ) to close friends.

Hiro Sasaki


----------



## Flaminius

*nichec*,
How about 阿 (_ā_) as a diminutive prefix?


----------



## nichec

Flaminius said:


> *nichec*,
> How about 阿 (_ā_) as a diminutive prefix?


 
Oh, this is a good one, 阿Fla


----------



## lammn

Hiro Sasaki said:


> I think that 小姐 is a kind of diminutive which express affection in
> Chinese.


 


nichec said:


> In my experience, you only call someone 小姐 when you don't know that person at all, it's extremely polite, I would only expect people working in the banks or such to call me 小姐, if someone I know calls me that, I would take it as a joke.


 


Hiro Sasaki said:


> I did not know 小姐 is so polite.


 
I don't think 小姐 can be classified as a "diminutive" suffix in Chinese, even though 小姐 is originally used as a suffix for young lady or unmarried woman. I don't know how the term is used in Taiwan, but in Mainland China, avoid calling someone 小姐 as much as possible because in _modern Mandarin_ 小姐 could mean those ladies working in night clubs and similar kinds of service industry.

As for diminutive prefix in Chinese, 小(xiăo) plus the person's surname is a commonly used diminutive prefix in Mandarin. For example, if someone is young and his/her surname is 叶, then s/he would probably be called 小叶. This is a diminutive prefix and has nothing to do with affection.

I'm afraid I can't think of any affectionate prefix/suffix in Chinese.


----------



## ThomasK

I still think we have something special that is not diminutive, no, more like dysphemistic: the John, or Johnny, Janie, Paulie... It is not that common anymore, but it feels fairly macho even, and it is only for men.


----------



## ThomasK

The funny thing might be that some of these suffixes or lexical words make it look as if they make something small whereas their only implication is affection. An English speaker need not refer to an objectively small car or boy when referring to "little car/ boy". Some Dutch speaker might translate that literally but that is wrong; one can only render that by using a diminutive (_autootje, jongetje_). I would not be surprised if that were almost universal.

Just by the way: *the number of "affectionately diminutive" words in Dutch seems to on the rise… In a restaurant or gastronomical context* lots of things seem to become "affectionate(ly small)", like: _groentjes_ (vegetables), _frietjes_ (French fries), _tafeltje_ (table), _watertje/wijntje/ biertje;_ But never the bill _(rekening)_! Yet society seems to become tougher (more macho?)...


----------



## ThomasK

I may be allowed to return to this topic but dropping all references to any kind of diminutives. I happened to hear a dialogue in an Australian series, where one Bella is simply referred to as "Bells" - and that is certain meant to be affectionate.


----------



## sound shift

ThomasK said:


> I may be allowed to return to this topic but dropping all references to any kind of diminutives. I happened to hear a dialogue in an Australian series, where one Bella is simply referred to as "Bells" - and that is certain meant to be affectionate.


Yes, that kind of thing happens a bit in BrE. For example, on 'Match of the Day', Ian Wright sometimes calls Gary Lineker 'Links'.


----------



## ThomasK

OK, thanks. Would you have an idea of how "deformation" (?) can be linked with affection? One could think it is disrespect (it might be considered like that in some cases), whereas it is definitely affection. Or mainly affection? 

Just a wild guess: affection is generally expressed by means of diminutives. Tenderness implies cuteness, some kind of defenselessness? Those deformations are also mainly shorter forms. Do they all have in common a relation between a protector and a loved one, a "possession", like small little gems?


----------



## Penyafort

Here the affective forms for names are more often hipocorisms, not diminutives. Usually the difference between Spanish and Catalan is that Catalan has traditionally tended more to do it with the last syllable:

Spanish: Francisco > Fran (Variants Paco, Pancho, Curro, etc have underwent phonetic changes)​Catalan: Francesc > Cesc​​Spanish: Salvador > Salva​Catalan: Salvador > Vador​​Spanish: Concepción > Conchi/Concha​Catalan: Concepció > Ció​​Spanish: Isabel > Isa​Catalan: Isabel > Bel​


----------



## Awwal12

ThomasK said:


> Thanks for the information, but it would be more interesting even if one or more of those suffixes or affixes were not dimininutives. The Flemish -ie for example is not a diminutive, I think - or must be consider the English suffix -y in _Teddy, Bobby,_ a suffix ? I don' think so. Can anyone shed a light on it ? (In English there is only have _little_, I think, as in _little boy,_ a lexical but not a synthetic _(?) diminutive_...)


Most of the Russian name formants are technically diminutive suffixes or contain those, but they don't necessarilly function as real diminutives with personal names. Some suffixes are also affective or "augmentative". And then there are stem alterations (usually plain shortenings, but often coming with various surprises - well, English is pretty tricky here as well after all).

For example:
Vladímir - formal (Church Slavonic form)
Volódya - informal, may be percieved as somewhat affective (a shortening from the extinct inherited form Volodímir/Volodímer; cf. Ukr. Volodýmyr)
Vóva - plain informal (a further shortening, with an apparently random consonant reduplication)
Volód'ka - diminutive, normally used when speaking about children or childhood friends, rare as a form of direct addressing
Vóvka - the same, but seems more actively used
Volóden'ka - a pretty strongly affective familiar form
Volódechka - same but rare
Vóvochka - maybe a bit less affective, and more used with children. "Vovochka" is a popular character in Russian jokes.
Vován - an "augmentative", markedly masculine familiar form which will be generally used between grown up boys or men of equal status (friends, fellow students, soldiers etc.)
Vovúlya - affective, practically cloying, you'll mostly imagine a granny addressing her beloved grandson in that manner
Other forms of the name are possible, but they will be much more marginal these days.

In the case of shortenings it's usually the ending that gets deleted, but there can be exceptions:
Vladisláv > Vlad or Sláva.


----------



## ThomasK

@Penyafort: I did not know the word 'hiporisms '(pet names...) but I think a lot of hiporisms are diminutives, but as Awwal points out: they do not have that meaning, that is for sure. Interesting to learn that you can make hiporisms by dropping the first part.

Awwal12: impressive list of variations!


----------



## Sobakus

I think the underlying process in the creation of hypocorisms is similar to nicknames: the use of those forms is only permitted to familiar people, and clearly they originated as original nicknames based on the person's given name, which were often foreign, exotic and difficult to pronounce (in the Christian world these are from Hebrew, Greek and Latin). Thus we have a linguistic distinction based on social status, reminiscent of the situation with honorifics. English is leading the way in levelling out social distinctions in language, therefore most original hypocoristic names have now become separate and some even fully autonomous, with no association to the original.


----------



## apmoy70

In Greek the familiar versions of proper names are shorter forms of the same name:

*«Ιωάννης»* [i.o̞ˈanis̠] (masc.) --> _John_, it's familiar form is *«Γιάννης»* [ˈʝanis̠] (masc.).
The affectionate name is usually its diminutive: *«Γιαννάκης»* [ʝaˈnakis̠] (masc.), lit. _little-John_ which is also a common surname (Παναγιώτης Γιαννάκης comes to mind).
Dialectal versions of it are *«Γιαννάκος»* [ʝaˈnako̞s̠] (masc.), *«Γιανούλης»* [ʝaˈnulis̠] (masc.), *«Γιαννούδης»* [ʝaˈnuðis̠] (masc.) etc.

Similarly for female names: *«Γεωργία»* [ʝe̞.o̞rˈʝi.a] (fem.) --> _Georɡia_ (the feminine form of George), its familiar form is *«Γιωργία»* [ʝo̞rˈʝi.a] (fem.), while its affectionate versions are *«Γιωργίτσα»* [ʝo̞rˈʝit͡s̠a] (fem.), *«Γιωργούλα»* [ʝo̞rˈɣula] (fem.) > *«Γιούλα»* [ˈʝula] (fem.), all mean _little-Georgia_ etc.

Trivia: There's a very well-known in the whole country traditional Greek Anatolian folk song from the town of Alatsata (present-day Alaçatı, Turkey, the town was established in the 17th c. by Greek salt harvesters in the salt marshes of Erythraia, a peninsula opposite the island of Chios on the western anatolian coast) with the title *«Γιωργίτσα»* [ʝo̞rˈʝit͡s̠a]:





Ἐγώ 'λεγα νά σ' ἀγαπῶ Γιωργίτσα μου
κανείς νὰ μὴν τὸ ξέρει
τώρα τὸ μάθανε οἱ δικοί Γιωργίτσα μου
τὸ μάθανε κι οἱ ξένοι.

Ἔλα Γιούλα Γιούλα Γιούλα ἔλα πάρε με
ἄνοιξε τὶς δυὸ ἀγκάλες μέσα βάλε με.

Τὸ γιασεμί στὴν πόρτα σου Γιωργίτσα μου
ἄνοιξε καὶ θὰ δέσει
τ'ἀγγελικό σου τὸ κορμί Γιωργίτσα μου
στὰ χέρια στὰ χέρια μου θὰ πέσει.

Ἔλα Γιούλα Γιούλα Γιούλα ἔλα πάρε με
ἄνοιξε τὶς δυὸ ἀγκάλες μέσα βάλε με.

Μάζεψε σὺ τὰ γιασεμιά Γιωργίτσα μου
κι ἐγώ τὰ βελονιάζω
πούλησε τήν ἀγάπη σου Γιωργίτσα
κι εγώ τὴν ἀγοράζω

Ἔλα Γιούλα Γιούλα Γιούλα ἔλα πάρε με
ἄνοιξε τὶς δυὸ ἀγκάλες μέσα βάλε με (x2).

I wished I loved you my Georgitsa
and no-one would know,
but now your next-of-kin knows, my Georgitsa,
everybody knows.

Come Yula, Yula, Yula take me
open your arms and hug me.

When the jasmine on your doorstep, my Georgitsa
will grow and bloom,
your angelic beauty, my Georgitsa,
will be mine.

Come Yula, Yula, Yula take me
open your arms and hug me

You pick the jasmine flowers, my Georgitsa,
and I'll secure them to the wreath,
Sell your love, my Georgitsa,
to me, I'll buy it.

Come Yula, Yula, Yula take me
open your arms and hug me (x2).


----------



## ThomasK

Always great to get that kind of background information, Apmoy! interesting to hear that those are just shorter names, not diminutives!



Sobakus said:


> I think the underlying process in the creation of hypocorisms is similar to nicknames: the use of those forms is only permitted to familiar people, and clearly they originated as original nicknames based on the person's given name, which were often foreign, exotic and difficult to pronounce (in the Christian world these are from Hebrew, Greek and Latin). Thus we have a linguistic distinction based on social status, reminiscent of the situation with honorifics. English is leading the way in levelling out social distinctions in language, therefore most original hypocoristic names have now become separate and some even fully autonomous, with no association to the original.


Interesting hypothesis, which reminds me of a professor I once had, who believed in affective language as the origin of language change (at least in some or in a lot of cases). But are you referring to names like Teddy, Johnny, where the origin is not that clear, or others? i think most people do not link those with Edward, Johannes, or ...


----------



## Sobakus

ThomasK said:


> But are you referring to names like Teddy, Johnny, where the origin is not that clear, or others? i think most people do not link those with Edward, Johannes, or ...


I meant that some hypocoristic forms are no longer clearly associated with the original name, while others still are (Danny < Daniel; Connie < Concetta or Constance), but even these are nevertheless used as separate given names. I've just found that Google is useful to check this - just start searching for a hypocoristic name and pick different people to see whether their birth name is full or hypocoristic (it's shown in the box to the right, from wikipedia).


ThomasK said:


> Interesting hypothesis, which reminds me of a professor I once had, who believed in affective language as the origin of language change (at least in some or in a lot of cases).


It sounds like he held it as an ideological belief, rather than something arrived at rationally, the way you present it. I'm sure there exist isolated cases where affective language does result in language change.


----------



## ThomasK

That is how i had understood it. Thanks. 

Well, the old professor's hypothesis was certainly based on research, but my only problem is that it is long ago and that it was not that important to me at that time to remember how he illustrated his theory. I have looked for articles but so far I have not found any. Later on perhaps.


----------



## Marsianitoh

In Basque we often adapt/deform Spanish names to shorter names which sound more like Basque and are more affectionate/ familiar:
José Ignacio = Xixio
Lorenzo= Lontzo/Lontxo
Cecilia= Xexili
José Miguel= Joxemiel
Ignacio= Inaxio
José María= Joxema(r)i
However, all these names are not fashionable anymore and belong mostly to old people, so they are bound to disappear.
With Basque names, we usually make them shorter if they are long or we add a diminutive if they are short ( you can add a diminutive to long names too, though).
- Kizkitza= Kizki
- Aitziber= Aitzi
- Loinaz= Loi
- Garikoitz= Gari
- Asier= Axi ( shorter)/Asiertxo (diminutive)
- Jon, Iker = Jontxo, Ikertxo.
We don't usually call adults names with diminutives.


----------



## ThomasK

The short forms are what interests us most, thanks! They do show affection, I am sure!


----------

