Rum. (u, i)-tz(a) [Re: Miguel & dentis]

From: George S t a n a
Message: 15178
Date: 2002-09-06

>Therefore, -tz is *not* a productive suffix in Romanian.

Oh, yes, Miguel, it is highly productive! As masc. "-utz", fem. "-utza"
(plural: "-utzi", "-utze", popular fem. plur. also "-utz√£") &
masc. "-itz", fem. "-itza". So, the diminutive for your example,
"televizor", will be then "televizorutz". This would appear as
natural to any native-speaker. But "televizoritz" would be weird
(perhaps excepting Moldavia, but even there I expect to be
perceived as weird). In this case, however, the native-speaker
will choose other suffixes, such as "-as" /aS/ or "-el". Anyway,
this word doesn't fit too well for diminutivization.

e.g. "fetitza" (girlie), "costitza" (riblet), "coronitza" (little crown),
"pomutz" (little tree), "dragutz" + "dragutza" (darling), "micutz/a"
(little, small, tiny), "picutz + piculetz" dim. for "pic", we wrote
about recently etc. In names: Ionutz (dim. for Ion = John), Vladutz
(for Vlad), Lenutza (dim. for Elena or Ileana), Anutza (for Ana = Ann),
Dorutzu (for Doru, that's the dim. of Teodor/Tudor) along with the
diminutives Tudoritza + Tudorica, Ghitza (short for Gheorghitza, dim.
of Gheorghe/George). (in names the ending "a" is /@/ in masc., /a/
in fem.; but in fem. vocative also /@/, except for Southern regions
in Banat, Oltenia and Muntenia (i.e. Wallachia), where the vocative
ending "-o" /o/ is preferred (and imposed onto the standard language).

The diminutival -utz/a, -itz/a (to a lesser extent -etz, this one being
rather under Slavic influence) are highly productive along with -a$(a)
-u$(a)/-i$(a), -ic(a), -el(a) + a second fem. -ea. In some cases the
diminutive forms comprise even two such suffixes combined.

>Miguel Carrasquer Vidal