Talk:-mageddon

Does this really qualify as a noun forming suffix, as opposed to just a common component of portmanteaus? Neither this nor -geddon#English have any commonly used attestations listed, which definitely suggests those terms are more of ad-hoc conversational utilities than independent linguistic lemmas. Achierius (talk) 03:21, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

RFD discussion: June–October 2020

The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

-mageddon

-mageddon seems like it is just a common portmaneuau component, rather than bona fide noun forming suffix. All listed attestations are poorly/sparsely used, which definitely suggests those terms are more of ad-hoc conversational utilities than independent linguistic lemmas. Achierius (talk) 03:28, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Delete. The only word using it is a portmanteau of Armageddon, and it is not a suffix. DonnanZ (talk) 08:25, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Abstain Delete. Words built on this should be indicated as {{blend|en|XYZ|Armageddon}}. — SGconlaw (talk) 11:56, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Changing my vote as I think I don't know enough about the matter. — SGconlaw (talk) 12:31, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

• Delete, and keep -geddon instead. Abstain per discussion regarding -gedden". bd2412 T 04:07, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
• Keep. Distinct from -geddon. This one is mainly attached to one-syllable nouns to preserve the syllabicity of Armageddon, whereas -geddon is attached to multi-syllable nouns. It's also productive, like -geddon. WordyAndNerdy (talk) 08:44, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
• Keep per WordyAndNerdy. Climageddon is another example of use; and yes, I know that it can plainly be analyzed as clima-geddon, but these are portmanteaus, where syllables are shared between morphemes. —Soap— 15:12, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
  • But the fact that these are portmanteaus is precisely the original reason given for deletion. There's no question that there's something productive here- the dispute is over what that "something" is. A template or a strategy for forming portmanteaus is not a suffix. Chuck Entz (talk) 20:47, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

FWIW, google:"suffix mageddon" finds some speakers who think of (or write about) -mageddon as a suffix, including MacMillan Dictionary, which mentions bird- and debt-mageddon as examples, among others; this Guardian piece suggests some other examples. In fact, I see more support (on the web, in the form of people saying they view something as a suffix) for -mageddon as a suffix than for -geddon. It is also possible to view all of them as blends rather than occurrences of a suffix, though. Meh. - -sche (discuss) 18:11, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't think it's a coincidence that the overwhelming majority of these have only minor variations on the phonological pattern of armageddon: ˌ[vowel]+[(optional) liquid] + m + [reduced vowel] + ˈgeddon. If there really is a true suffix, it's still pretty rare. The problem is that "portmanteau pattern" isn't a recognizable morphological category, so people use the closest one that sort of fits to describe this. It's basically a sort of snowclone that operates within rather than between words. Chuck Entz (talk) 20:47, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

• Abstain: (A copy from #-geddon:) Not clear to what extent we should document blend/portmanteau formation patterns as suffixes. Multiple dictionaries do have -gate for Watergate-based blends, but we can note that Category:English words suffixed with -gate has 151 items. For Armageddon, the implied quasi-suffixes would include -mageddon and -geddon. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:17, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
• RFD-kept. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:57, 4 October 2020 (UTC)