Skip to main content
added 10 characters in body
Source Link
tchrist
  • 137.3k
  • 49
  • 376
  • 609

Simple Explanation

The easy answer is because read is a Germanic verb, whereas all those others come from Latin verbs — and indeed often enough from actual Latin nouns like English conjugation < Latin conjugatio.

Latin never had a *readatio noun, and thus neither does English. It did, however, have lectiones that were read by lectors. The word lection does exist in English, but it is by no means common, especially today. Few would understand you outside certain ecclesiastical circles. From the OED:

  • 1885 W. Pater Marius the Epicurean II. 135
    Those lections, or sacred readings, which..occurred at certain intervals amid the silence of the assembly.

  • 1927 Alan Hugh McNeile An introduction to the study of the New Testament 383
    It [sc. the Codex Bezae] contains certain lection marks which Brightman holds to be Byzantine.


Technical Explanation

In their professional linguistics paper on “Restricting suffix combinations in English and German” from pp. 451–490 of the journal Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Vol. 20, № 3 (August 2002), authors Mark Aronoff and Nanna Fuhrhop write:

Although English morphology has a highly productive Latinate component, the fact that only the Germanic suffixes obey the monosuffix constraint shows that the two types of suffixes are still distinct. Furthermore, although Latinate suffixes may disobey the constraint, they attach to unsuffixed words much less commonly than Germanic suffixes do, and they normally attach to suffixes which also carry the feature Latinate, so the picture drawn here is that there are two different word-formation systems, especially within the combination of suffixes, one Germanic and one Latinate. Latinate suffixes do not attach frequently to free monomorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes, for the most part, do (this is the monosuffix constraint). Latinate suffixes attach frequently to free polymorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes (except ‑ness) do not. So, the two types of suffixes are largely in complementary distribution.

The major takeaways from that paragraph that apply to your question are:

  1. English has two distinct word-formation systems.
  2. Latinate suffixes seldom attach to free monomorphemic stems,...
  3. ... least of all to ones that themselves lack the Latinate property.

Your verb read is a a free monomorphemic stem which furthermore lacks the trait of being Latinate, while your various ‑tion/‑sion/-cion type suffixes are Latinate ones.

Hence the constraint against that combination.

Simple Explanation

The easy answer is because read is a Germanic verb, whereas all those others come from Latin verbs — and indeed often enough from actual Latin nouns like English conjugation < Latin conjugatio.

Latin never had a *readatio noun, and thus neither does English. It did, however, have lectiones that were read by lectors. The word lection does exist in English, but it is by no means common, especially today. Few would understand you outside certain ecclesiastical circles. From the OED:

  • 1885 W. Pater Marius the Epicurean II. 135
    Those lections, or sacred readings, which..occurred at certain intervals amid the silence of the assembly.

  • 1927 Alan Hugh McNeile An introduction to the study of the New Testament 383
    It [sc. the Codex Bezae] contains certain lection marks which Brightman holds to be Byzantine.


Technical Explanation

In their professional linguistics paper on “Restricting suffix combinations in English and German” from pp. 451–490 of the journal Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Vol. 20, № 3 (August 2002), authors Mark Aronoff and Nanna Fuhrhop write:

Although English morphology has a highly productive Latinate component, the fact that only the Germanic suffixes obey the monosuffix constraint shows that the two types of suffixes are still distinct. Furthermore, although Latinate suffixes may disobey the constraint, they attach to unsuffixed words much less commonly than Germanic suffixes do, and they normally attach to suffixes which also carry the feature Latinate, so the picture drawn here is that there are two different word-formation systems, especially within the combination of suffixes, one Germanic and one Latinate. Latinate suffixes do not attach frequently to free monomorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes, for the most part, do (this is the monosuffix constraint). Latinate suffixes attach frequently to free polymorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes (except ‑ness) do not. So, the two types of suffixes are largely in complementary distribution.

The major takeaways from that paragraph that apply to your question are:

  1. English has two distinct word-formation systems.
  2. Latinate suffixes seldom attach to free monomorphemic stems, least of all to ones that themselves lack the Latinate property.

Your verb read is a a free monomorphemic stem which furthermore lacks the trait of being Latinate, while your various ‑tion/‑sion/-cion type suffixes are Latinate ones.

Hence the constraint against that combination.

Simple Explanation

The easy answer is because read is a Germanic verb, whereas all those others come from Latin verbs — and indeed often enough from actual Latin nouns like English conjugation < Latin conjugatio.

Latin never had a *readatio noun, and thus neither does English. It did, however, have lectiones that were read by lectors. The word lection does exist in English, but it is by no means common, especially today. Few would understand you outside certain ecclesiastical circles. From the OED:

  • 1885 W. Pater Marius the Epicurean II. 135
    Those lections, or sacred readings, which..occurred at certain intervals amid the silence of the assembly.

  • 1927 Alan Hugh McNeile An introduction to the study of the New Testament 383
    It [sc. the Codex Bezae] contains certain lection marks which Brightman holds to be Byzantine.


Technical Explanation

In their professional linguistics paper on “Restricting suffix combinations in English and German” from pp. 451–490 of the journal Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Vol. 20, № 3 (August 2002), authors Mark Aronoff and Nanna Fuhrhop write:

Although English morphology has a highly productive Latinate component, the fact that only the Germanic suffixes obey the monosuffix constraint shows that the two types of suffixes are still distinct. Furthermore, although Latinate suffixes may disobey the constraint, they attach to unsuffixed words much less commonly than Germanic suffixes do, and they normally attach to suffixes which also carry the feature Latinate, so the picture drawn here is that there are two different word-formation systems, especially within the combination of suffixes, one Germanic and one Latinate. Latinate suffixes do not attach frequently to free monomorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes, for the most part, do (this is the monosuffix constraint). Latinate suffixes attach frequently to free polymorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes (except ‑ness) do not. So, the two types of suffixes are largely in complementary distribution.

The major takeaways from that paragraph that apply to your question are:

  1. English has two distinct word-formation systems.
  2. Latinate suffixes seldom attach to free monomorphemic stems...
  3. ... least of all to ones that themselves lack the Latinate property.

Your verb read is a a free monomorphemic stem which furthermore lacks the trait of being Latinate, while your various ‑tion/‑sion/-cion type suffixes are Latinate ones.

Hence the constraint against that combination.

added 2 characters in body
Source Link
tchrist
  • 137.3k
  • 49
  • 376
  • 609

Simple Explanation

The easy answer is quite simply because read is a GermanicGermanic verb, whereas all those others come from LatinLatin verbs and indeed often enough from actual Latin nouns like English conjugation < Latin conjugatio.

Latin never had a *readatio noun, and thus neither does English. It did, however, have lectiones that were read by lectors. The word lection does exist in English, but it is by no means common, especially today. Few would understand you outside certain ecclesiastical circles. From the OED:

  • 1885 W. Pater Marius the Epicurean II. 135
    Those lections, or sacred readings, which..occurred at certain intervals amid the silence of the assembly.

  • 1927 Alan Hugh McNeile An introduction to the study of the New Testament 383
    It [sc. the Codex Bezae] contains certain lection marks which Brightman holds to be Byzantine.


Technical Explanation

In their professional linguistics articlepaper on “Restricting suffix combinations in English and German” from pp. 451–490 of the journal Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Vol. 20, № 3 (August 2002), authors Mark Aronoff and Nanna Fuhrhop write:

Although English morphology has a highly productive Latinate component, the fact that only the Germanic suffixes obey the monosuffix constraint shows that the two types of suffixes are still distinct. Furthermore, although Latinate suffixes may disobey the constraint, they attach to unsuffixed words much less commonly than Germanic suffixes do, and they normally attach to suffixes which also carry the feature Latinate, so the picture drawn here is that there are two different word-formation systems, especially within the combination of suffixes, one Germanic and one Latinate. Latinate suffixes do not attach frequently to free monomorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes, for the most part, do (this is the monosuffix constraint). Latinate suffixes attach frequently to free polymorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes (except ‑ness) do not. So, the two types of suffixes are largely in complementary distribution.

The major takeaways from that paragraph that apply to your question are:

  1. English has two distinct word-formation systems.
  2. Latinate suffixes seldom attach to free monomorphemic stems, least of all to ones that themselves lack the Latinate property.

Your verb read is a a free monomorphemic stem which furthermore lacks the trait of being Latinate, while your various ‑tion/‑sion/-cion type suffixes are Latinate ones.

Hence the constraint against that combination.

Simple Explanation

The answer is quite simply because read is a Germanic verb, whereas all those others come from Latin verbs and indeed often enough from actual Latin nouns like English conjugation < Latin conjugatio.

Latin never had a *readatio noun, and thus neither does English. It did, however, have lectiones that were read by lectors. The word lection does exist in English, but it is by no means common, especially today. Few would understand you outside certain ecclesiastical circles. From the OED:

  • 1885 W. Pater Marius the Epicurean II. 135
    Those lections, or sacred readings, which..occurred at certain intervals amid the silence of the assembly.

  • 1927 Alan Hugh McNeile An introduction to the study of the New Testament 383
    It [sc. the Codex Bezae] contains certain lection marks which Brightman holds to be Byzantine.


Technical Explanation

In their professional linguistics article on “Restricting suffix combinations in English and German” from pp. 451–490 of the journal Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Vol. 20, № 3 (August 2002), authors Mark Aronoff and Nanna Fuhrhop write:

Although English morphology has a highly productive Latinate component, the fact that only the Germanic suffixes obey the monosuffix constraint shows that the two types of suffixes are still distinct. Furthermore, although Latinate suffixes may disobey the constraint, they attach to unsuffixed words much less commonly than Germanic suffixes do, and they normally attach to suffixes which also carry the feature Latinate, so the picture drawn here is that there are two different word-formation systems, especially within the combination of suffixes, one Germanic and one Latinate. Latinate suffixes do not attach frequently to free monomorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes, for the most part, do (this is the monosuffix constraint). Latinate suffixes attach frequently to free polymorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes (except ‑ness) do not. So, the two types of suffixes are largely in complementary distribution.

The major takeaways from that paragraph that apply to your question are:

  1. English has two distinct word-formation systems.
  2. Latinate suffixes seldom attach to free monomorphemic stems, least of all to ones that themselves lack the Latinate property.

Your verb read is a a free monomorphemic stem which furthermore lacks the trait of being Latinate, while your various ‑tion/‑sion/-cion type suffixes are Latinate ones.

Hence the constraint against that combination.

Simple Explanation

The easy answer is because read is a Germanic verb, whereas all those others come from Latin verbs and indeed often enough from actual Latin nouns like English conjugation < Latin conjugatio.

Latin never had a *readatio noun, and thus neither does English. It did, however, have lectiones that were read by lectors. The word lection does exist in English, but it is by no means common, especially today. Few would understand you outside certain ecclesiastical circles. From the OED:

  • 1885 W. Pater Marius the Epicurean II. 135
    Those lections, or sacred readings, which..occurred at certain intervals amid the silence of the assembly.

  • 1927 Alan Hugh McNeile An introduction to the study of the New Testament 383
    It [sc. the Codex Bezae] contains certain lection marks which Brightman holds to be Byzantine.


Technical Explanation

In their professional linguistics paper on “Restricting suffix combinations in English and German” from pp. 451–490 of the journal Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Vol. 20, № 3 (August 2002), authors Mark Aronoff and Nanna Fuhrhop write:

Although English morphology has a highly productive Latinate component, the fact that only the Germanic suffixes obey the monosuffix constraint shows that the two types of suffixes are still distinct. Furthermore, although Latinate suffixes may disobey the constraint, they attach to unsuffixed words much less commonly than Germanic suffixes do, and they normally attach to suffixes which also carry the feature Latinate, so the picture drawn here is that there are two different word-formation systems, especially within the combination of suffixes, one Germanic and one Latinate. Latinate suffixes do not attach frequently to free monomorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes, for the most part, do (this is the monosuffix constraint). Latinate suffixes attach frequently to free polymorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes (except ‑ness) do not. So, the two types of suffixes are largely in complementary distribution.

The major takeaways from that paragraph that apply to your question are:

  1. English has two distinct word-formation systems.
  2. Latinate suffixes seldom attach to free monomorphemic stems, least of all to ones that themselves lack the Latinate property.

Your verb read is a a free monomorphemic stem which furthermore lacks the trait of being Latinate, while your various ‑tion/‑sion/-cion type suffixes are Latinate ones.

Hence the constraint against that combination.

added 62 characters in body
Source Link
tchrist
  • 137.3k
  • 49
  • 376
  • 609

Simple Explanation

The answer is quite simply because read is a Germanic verb, whereas all those others come from Latin verbs and indeed often enough from actual Latin nouns like English conjugation < Latin conjugatio.

Latin never had a *readatio noun, and thus neither does English. It did, however, have lectiones that were read by lectors. The word lection does exist in English, but it is by no means common, especially today. Few would understand you outside certain ecclesiastical circles. From the OED:

  • 1885 W. Pater Marius the Epicurean II. 135
    Those lections, or sacred readings, which..occurred at certain intervals amid the silence of the assembly.

  • 1927 Alan Hugh McNeile An introduction to the study of the New Testament 383
    It [sc. the Codex Bezae] contains certain lection marks which Brightman holds to be Byzantine.


Technical Explanation

In their professional linguistics article on “Restricting suffix combinations in English and German” from pp. 451–490 451–490 of the journal Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Vol. 20 20, No. 3№ 3 (Aug.,August 2002), authors Mark Aronoff and Nanna Fuhrhop write:

Although English morphology has a highly productive Latinate component, the fact that only the Germanic suffixes obey the monosuffix constraint shows that the two types of suffixes are still distinct. Furthermore, although Latinate suffixes may disobey the constraint, they attach to unsuffixed words much less commonly than Germanic suffixes do, and they normally attach to suffixes which also carry the feature Latinate, so the picture drawn here is that there are two different word-formation systems, especially within the combination of suffixes, one Germanic and one Latinate. Latinate suffixes do not attach frequently to free monomorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes, for the most part, do (this is the monosuffix constraint). Latinate suffixes attach frequently to free polymorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes (except ‑ness) do not. So, the two types of suffixes are largely in complementary distribution.

The major takeaways from that paragraph that apply to your question are that:

  1. English has two distinct word-formation systems.
  2. Latinate suffixes seldom attach to free monomorphemic stems, least of all to ones that themselves lack the Latinate property.

Your verb read is a a free monomorphemic stem which furthermore lacks the trait of being Latinate, while your various ‑tion/‑sion/-cion type suffixes are Latinate ones.

Hence the constraint against that combination.

Simple Explanation

The answer is quite simply because read is a Germanic verb, whereas all those others come from Latin verbs and indeed often enough from actual Latin nouns like English conjugation < Latin conjugatio.

Latin never had a *readatio noun, and thus neither does English. It did, however, have lectiones that were read by lectors. The word lection does exist in English, but it is by no means common, especially today. Few would understand you outside certain ecclesiastical circles. From the OED:

  • 1885 W. Pater Marius the Epicurean II. 135
    Those lections, or sacred readings, which..occurred at certain intervals amid the silence of the assembly.

  • 1927 Alan Hugh McNeile An introduction to the study of the New Testament 383
    It [sc. the Codex Bezae] contains certain lection marks which Brightman holds to be Byzantine.


Technical Explanation

In their professional linguistics article on “Restricting suffix combinations in English and German” from pp. 451–490 of the journal Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Vol. 20, No. 3 (Aug., 2002), authors Mark Aronoff and Nanna Fuhrhop write:

Although English morphology has a highly productive Latinate component, the fact that only the Germanic suffixes obey the monosuffix constraint shows that the two types of suffixes are still distinct. Furthermore, although Latinate suffixes may disobey the constraint, they attach to unsuffixed words much less commonly than Germanic suffixes do, and they normally attach to suffixes which also carry the feature Latinate, so the picture drawn here is that there are two different word-formation systems, especially within the combination of suffixes, one Germanic and one Latinate. Latinate suffixes do not attach frequently to free monomorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes, for the most part, do (this is the monosuffix constraint). Latinate suffixes attach frequently to free polymorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes (except ‑ness) do not. So, the two types of suffixes are largely in complementary distribution.

The major takeaways from that paragraph that apply to your question are that:

  1. English has two distinct word-formation systems.
  2. Latinate suffixes seldom attach to free monomorphemic stems.

Your verb read is a a free monomorphemic stem which furthermore lacks the trait of being Latinate, while your various ‑tion/‑sion/-cion type suffixes are Latinate ones.

Hence the constraint against that combination.

Simple Explanation

The answer is quite simply because read is a Germanic verb, whereas all those others come from Latin verbs and indeed often enough from actual Latin nouns like English conjugation < Latin conjugatio.

Latin never had a *readatio noun, and thus neither does English. It did, however, have lectiones that were read by lectors. The word lection does exist in English, but it is by no means common, especially today. Few would understand you outside certain ecclesiastical circles. From the OED:

  • 1885 W. Pater Marius the Epicurean II. 135
    Those lections, or sacred readings, which..occurred at certain intervals amid the silence of the assembly.

  • 1927 Alan Hugh McNeile An introduction to the study of the New Testament 383
    It [sc. the Codex Bezae] contains certain lection marks which Brightman holds to be Byzantine.


Technical Explanation

In their professional linguistics article on “Restricting suffix combinations in English and German” from pp. 451–490 of the journal Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Vol. 20, № 3 (August 2002), authors Mark Aronoff and Nanna Fuhrhop write:

Although English morphology has a highly productive Latinate component, the fact that only the Germanic suffixes obey the monosuffix constraint shows that the two types of suffixes are still distinct. Furthermore, although Latinate suffixes may disobey the constraint, they attach to unsuffixed words much less commonly than Germanic suffixes do, and they normally attach to suffixes which also carry the feature Latinate, so the picture drawn here is that there are two different word-formation systems, especially within the combination of suffixes, one Germanic and one Latinate. Latinate suffixes do not attach frequently to free monomorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes, for the most part, do (this is the monosuffix constraint). Latinate suffixes attach frequently to free polymorphemic stems, while Germanic suffixes (except ‑ness) do not. So, the two types of suffixes are largely in complementary distribution.

The major takeaways from that paragraph that apply to your question are:

  1. English has two distinct word-formation systems.
  2. Latinate suffixes seldom attach to free monomorphemic stems, least of all to ones that themselves lack the Latinate property.

Your verb read is a a free monomorphemic stem which furthermore lacks the trait of being Latinate, while your various ‑tion/‑sion/-cion type suffixes are Latinate ones.

Hence the constraint against that combination.

added 52 characters in body
Source Link
tchrist
  • 137.3k
  • 49
  • 376
  • 609
Loading
added 1808 characters in body
Source Link
tchrist
  • 137.3k
  • 49
  • 376
  • 609
Loading
added 119 characters in body
Source Link
tchrist
  • 137.3k
  • 49
  • 376
  • 609
Loading
Source Link
tchrist
  • 137.3k
  • 49
  • 376
  • 609
Loading