# Slovene: -il-/-al- (noun and adjective suffix)



## Gavril

Živijo,

Many Slovenian nouns and adjectives seem to contain a suffix *-il-*/-*al*-:

_nabir*al*nik_ "mailbox" < _nabirati/nabrati_ "gather"
_potov*al*ni _(as used in phrases like _potovalni ček_ "traveler's check") < _pot_
_hlad*il*nik _"refrigerator" < _hlad

_On the other hand, there are nouns and adjectives that are formed from similar elements but don't have an -_il_-/-_al_- suffix:
_
potni _(as in _potni list _"passport", etc.) < _pot_
_čekovni _(_čekovna knjižica_ "checkbook", etc.) < _ček
prodnik_ "pebble" < _prod_ "gravel"

Do the noun/adjective suffixes -_il_- and -_al_- have a clear meaning that helps you predict where they will appear? (Perhaps they are related to the past-tense suffix -*l*, for example?)

Or, do I simply have to memorize where these suffixes appear and where they don't?

Najlepša hvala,
Gavril


----------



## Irbis

I don't know the theory behing this, word formation is not my erea of expertise.
But all those sample nouns seems to be created from verb -l form (deležnik na -l) with -nik added. And it means that this noun (and nouns with ending -nik are tipical for things, not people) is doing the thing, described in verb.
You have mor examples like these:
gugalnik - rocking chair
bralnik - reader/scanner
iskalnik - search engine
sesalnik - vacuum cleaner
brskalnik - browser
črkovalnik - spell checker
pregledovalnik - checker
prevajalnik - compiler/translation program

This is still alive way to form new words, as you can see from the samples above, many new words are formed this way (and I've just noticedthat undefinite verbs are used).
For persons you would use -ec (male) or -ka (female) insteak -nik.
All these are similar to English verb + -er nouns.


----------



## Gavril

What about adjectives in -(_a)lni_, such as _potovalni _(_potovalni ček_, etc.)?

I see now that _potovalni_ could be based on the verb _potovati_, but I'm still not sure what meaning the -_alni_ suffix adds.

Hvala znova


----------



## Irbis

"-len" ("-lni" as definite form) is adjetive for something, that is used for doing something:
pisalen (pisati: pisalna miza, pisalni stroj)
pralen (prati: pralni stroj; but pralen also means "washable")
pomivalen (pomivati: pomivalni stroj)
bralen (brati; bralna lučka)


----------



## Gavril

I realized that this might be the same -l- suffix seen in

_let*al*išče_ "airport" < _letati_ "fly"
_drs*al*išče_ "ice rink" < _drsati_ "skate"
etc.

But then why is the -_l_- missing in words such as *ležišče* "bed"? If _ležišče_ is based on the verb _ležati_ "lie (down)", why isn't it _lež__al__išče_ instead?

(I'm not saying that there must be an answer to this question -- I'm just curious whether _ležišče _reflects a larger pattern.)


----------



## Irbis

I guess it was too long so people shortened it.
But in 1895 Pleteršnik dictionary there is a word "ležališče" with German translation "Lager" (which can also mean "ležišče").


----------



## Duya

I don't think so. Apparently, forms on _-alen, -ališče_ are derived from imperfective verbs on _-ati_, while  forms on _-en, -išče_ are derived from their shorter, perfective pairs. Now, I don't see a deeper semantic reason; BCS generally prefers shorter (_putni_), and Slovene longer forms (_potovalni_), but there's no hard rule. I can even think of a few paronyms in BCS, like _odmaralište_ 'resort' and _odmorište_ 'resting place' (next to road or on staircase). Also, not same set of suffixes is productive in BCS and Slovene (some of words mentioned above have -aći, -alnica, etc.)

My point is that, while in the other Gavril's question we detected Common Slavic origin of -k- adjectives by comparative analysis, here the process seems to be recent and semi-random.


----------



## Gavril

Hi Duya,



Duya said:


> I don't think so. Apparently, forms on _-alen, -ališče_ are derived from imperfective verbs on _-ati_, while  forms on _-en, -išče_ are derived from their shorter, perfective pairs.



Do you mean that _ležišče _is based on a stem like _leči, zlekniti se,_ etc.? These are the only perfective counterparts of _legati_/_ležati_ that I can find right now.

Other than _ležišče_, are there any other -_išče _nouns in Slovene that are (seemingly) based on a verb, but are not formed from an -_l_- stem?


----------



## Morana_

In SSKJ, there are 454 nouns ending in _-išče_: http://bos.zrc-sazu.si/cgi/a03.exe?name=sskj_testa&expression=ge=*išče&hs=1

113 of them end in _-ališče_: http://bos.zrc-sazu.si/cgi/a03.exe?name=sskj_testa&expression=ge=*ališče&hs=1

All of these "_-ališče _nouns" are formed from imperfective verbs.

As for the rest of "-_išče _nouns" (without those ending in _-ališče_), they are mostly formed from nouns (for instance: _ajdišče_ from _ajda_, _bobrišče_ from _bober_, _bojišče_ from _boj_, _cestišče_ from _cesta_ etc.), many of them are formed from verbs (perfective and imperfective, for instance _cepišče_ from _cepiti_), and some even from adjectives (_ajdovišče_ from _ajdov_).

As for _poten/potovalen_:
- _poten_ is formed from _pot_ (noun), examples are potni načrt, potna obleka, (po)potna palica, (po)potni tovariš, potni list, potni nalog, potni stroški;
- _potovalen_ is formed from _potovati_ (imperfective verb), examples are  potovalni čas, potovalni načrt, potovalne potrebščine, potovalna  mrzlica, potovalni urad, potovalna agencija, potovalna torba.


----------



## Morana_

Gavril said:


> I realized that this might be the same -l- suffix seen in
> 
> _let*al*išče_ "airport" < _letati_ "fly"
> _drs*al*išče_ "ice rink" < _drsati_ "skate"
> etc.
> 
> But then why is the -_l_- missing in words such as *ležišče* "bed"? If _ležišče_ is based on the verb _ležati_ "lie (down)", why isn't it _lež__al__išče_ instead?
> 
> (I'm not saying that there must be an answer to this question -- I'm just curious whether _ležišče _reflects a larger pattern.)



Well, there is an answer to this question and it's quite simple: nouns ending in _-ališče _denote, without exception, a place where the activity expressed by the original verb is (being) done. _Ležališče_ (a non-existant word) would therefore mean "a place where people go to lie (down)" - and _ležišče _is not a place, but simply a bed of any sort (a device, so to speak, with which you do what the verb says, not a place where you do it).


----------



## Gavril

Morana_ said:


> Well, there is an answer to this question and it's quite simple: nouns ending in _-ališče _denote, without exception, a place where the activity expressed by the original verb is (being) done. _Ležališče_ (a non-existant word) would therefore mean "a place where people go to lie (down)" - and _ležišče _is not a place, but simply a bed of any sort (a device, so to speak, with which you do what the verb says, not a place where you do it).



OK, but does this mean that _ležišče_ is not derived from _ležati_ or a similar verb? If so, where (as far as you know) would _ležišče _come from? The noun _lega_ "position" is the closest possibility I've found so far.


----------



## Duya

Rather, they all derive from the same root, _lež-_, by means of suffixation. 

Morana's SSKJ lists also provides a few paronyms, along the lines of her explanation: _gledišče_ 'viewpoint' : _gledališče_ 'auditorium'; _obesišče_ 'hanging point' : _obešališče_ 'gallows'; _stalište_ 'standpoint' (figurative) : _stajališče_ 'station, bus stop'.


----------



## Morana_

Yes, they derive from the same root, but this root is actually _leg-_, isn't it?

_Ležišče_ follows the same pattern as _sedišče_ and _stojišče,_ these nouns are derived from the present form of the verbs _ležati_, _sedeti_ and _stati_:
- ležim, ležiš, leži / leživa, ležita, ležita / ležimo, ležite, ležijo na ležišču;
- sedim, sediš, sedi / sediva, sedita, sedita / sedimo, sedite, sedijo na sedišču;
- stojim, stojiš, stoji / stojiva, stojita, stojita / stojimo, stojite, stojijo na stojišču.



> If so, where (as far as you know) would _ležišče _come from? The noun _lega_ "position" is the closest possibility I've found so far.


No, _lega_ is itself a derivative (gerund) from _leči_.

Then there's another thing I'd like to point out; you drew parallels a few posts earlier between _ležati_ and _letati._ Now these verbs are not actually analogous: the analogue of _lež*á*ti_ is _let*é*ti, _not _l*é*tati _(note the accentuation)_. _They are both imperfective verbs (like _lež*á*ti _is), but _let*é*ti_ means simply _to fly,_ while _l*é*tati _is iterative and means _to fly repeatedly, again and again, _it implies repetition. 
_Lež*á*ti _lacks such an iterative pair. There is, of course, _l*é*gati_ (imperfective and very rarely used), but that's a pair to _l*é*či_ (perfective, meaning _to lie down)_, not _lež*á*ti (_imperfectiv_e_, _to be lying_).


----------



## Gavril

Thanks, Morana.

If I can ask one more question, is there a connection between

1. Verbs with accent on the suffix or penultimate syllable (_lež*á*ti_, _s*é*sti_, _st*á*ti_, etc.)
and
2. Derivatives in -_išče_ (as opposed to -_ališče_, -_ilišče_ etc.)

You described the contrast between -_ališče_ / -_išče_ as being related to the contrast between a wider area (-_ališče_) and a single spot/point (-_išče_), but I was curious if this is also correlated with the distinction above.

Znova hvala




Morana_ said:


> Yes, they derive from the same root, but this root is actually _leg-_, isn't it?
> 
> _Ležišče_ follows the same pattern as _sedišče_ and _stojišče,_ these nouns are derived from the present form of the verbs _ležati_, _sedeti_ and _stati_:
> - ležim, ležiš, leži / leživa, ležita, ležita / ležimo, ležite, ležijo na ležišču;
> - sedim, sediš, sedi / sediva, sedita, sedita / sedimo, sedite, sedijo na sedišču;
> - stojim, stojiš, stoji / stojiva, stojita, stojita / stojimo, stojite, stojijo na stojišču.
> 
> 
> No, _lega_ is itself a derivative (gerund) from _leči_.
> 
> Then there's another thing I'd like to point out; you drew parallels a few posts earlier between _ležati_ and _letati._ Now these verbs are not actually analogous: the analogue of _lež*á*ti_ is _let*é*ti, _not _l*é*tati _(note the accentuation)_. _They are both imperfective verbs (like _lež*á*ti _is), but _let*é*ti_ means simply _to fly,_ while _l*é*tati _is iterative and means _to fly repeatedly, again and again, _it implies repetition.
> _Lež*á*ti _lacks such an iterative pair. There is, of course, _l*é*gati_ (imperfective and very rarely used), but that's a pair to _l*é*či_ (perfective, meaning _to lie down)_, not _lež*á*ti (_imperfectiv_e_, _to be lying_).


----------

