Talk:-ingstock

-ingstock
I was gonna speedy delete this as an obvious hoax, but since the creator is an admin he might restore it, and I wanted to avoid conflict, so here it is. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I've modeled the entry on some key elements of [[-ren]]. I would like to see an explicit rationale for deletion. DCDuring TALK 17:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Um, yeah. Well, this is not analogous to -ren for one good reason: the true split of this is gerund +  as a compound. Stock can be joined to any gerund of any verb (eating + stock, running + stock, etc.) Leasnam (talk) 18:00, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Unlike -ren, the entry lacks a true definition. What kind of nouns? with what meanings? -ren forms plurals. Leasnam (talk) 18:09, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Now (and I honestly suspect this may have been for effect; please forgive me if I am mistaken...) if in the next phase of English this becomes opaque, then yes, it can develop into a suffix! But not yet I don't think. Leasnam (talk) 18:03, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you're right. Current speakers can still easily analyse this as laugh + -ing + stock. It seems to me that the grouping (laugh + -ing) + stock is more likely than laugh + (-ing + stock), although I'm not quite sure why. 18:08, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Correct. -ren is different. Leasnam (talk) 18:14, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It doesn't exist. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe WT:POINT should exist. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I was also going to delete it on sight but got sidetracked. I have now deleted the associated category. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:53, 8 September 2012 (UTC)