Thread:User talk:CodeCat/adesurio and abligurrio/reply (9)

Yes, I'm treating them as separate suffixes, and also. For, you can think of it this way: Since the supine of is , and we know the ending of the supine is , you can reason that a hypothetical ending  alone would give  (i.e. removing -um from -tum gives -t-). If you then extend that ending to, it follows that the result must be. Thus, the first -t- of the ending is "hidden" inside the -s- of the supine. But this doesn't work for, because we know that the supine is and therefore the endings  and  would give  and  respectively. So the only option is to treat as a separate suffix.