Category talk:English words derived from: -er Etymology 1

Etymology number could be changed, is it a good idea to categorize words by etymology number? Ddpy 20:41, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes it could. But we often have more than one Verb or Noun section in a language section, especially English. Those are completely indistinguishable. In any event, Etymology numbers tend not to change very often and are the best we can do. DCDuring TALK 22:32, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Could we do like this? Ddpy 22:44, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that I understand the example. Are you associating a category with individual senses of the morpheme? If so, that is not a model we would want to follow. DCDuring TALK 23:01, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * How would you do it if the modern senses of the morpheme were diverse and the the core sense was obsolete and obscure to modern users. The example enjoys the happy coincidence of having a single sense. The other affix and noun derivation categories don't have a gloss, just like the usual English practice. DCDuring TALK  23:07, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Could we do like this English example? Ddpy 23:35, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * It would be something like ""-er" agent suffix". But that model might not work for the other etymologies of -er. I'm not even happy that Etymology 1 really shows a single derivation. I would think it better to start with the suffixes that are more clearly a single etymology, like the verbs ending in frequentative -er. I wouldn't undertake this without nailing down the derivation of each etymology that was to be worked on. DCDuring TALK 00:35, 28 February 2011 (UTC)