Endings to Verbs for Nouns, -iente -ante -ador
I've seen several ways that endings to a verb are applied to make it a noun.
I've seen the -ador one "comprar=comprador" and the -ante -iente ending. such as "estudiar=estudiante(student)" wheras "vivir=viviente(living)"
I've seen the -iente -ante used as equivalents to English's -ing ending adjectives, and also as a noun for one who does the action. What I want to know is how do each of the types of endings dominate in their categories?
2 Answers
I've seen the -iente -ante used as equivalents to English's -ing ending adjectives, and also as a noun for one who does the action.
Many of the adjectives that end in -ante and -iente endings, along with -ente, make up a class of adjectives (and derived nouns) that represent remnants of the now defunct present participle of early Spanish.
For this reason, it is often possible to find a direct overlap with the English present participle when translating adjectives of this type from Spanish to English. For example:
- La Bella durmiente ? Sleeping Beauty
- La madre doliente ? The grieving mother
- Estoy seguro de que va a ser un partido muy exigente ? I am sure that it is going to be a very demanding game.
- Nos encontramos con un gobierno intransigente ? We met with an uncompromising government
- en un mundo cambiante ? in a changing world
- La lluvia no atenúa el calor agobiante ? The rain does not diminish the overwhelming heat
- Tomó nota ayer de las picantes declaraciones de Alberto Maguid ? He took notice yesterday of the stinging/cutting statements made by Alberto Maguid.
In any case, as you have noted, these can often be used as nouns, but need not always refer to a person. For example:
- un alto contenido de un contaminante derivado del petróleo ? a high concentration of a petroleum based contaminant.
- Cafeína es un estimulante del sistema nervioso central ? Caffeine is a stimulant of the central nervous system.
thank you. am I able to do that with any verb?
That's an interesting proposition. It brings to mind an expression that was once told to me by an English professors: Language is a community of agreement.
I suppose that in theory, you probably could take a verb's root and concoct a noun based upon certain grammatical analyses of these noun endings; however, the question then becomes one of acceptability. Namely, would anyone in your language community accept this newly minted expression?
Consider that in English we see a similar pattern of word endings with the suffixes "-ant" and "-or/-er." However, as with Spanish, the introduction of nouns into the language community is restricted by the general acceptability of such terms. For example, consider the following set of cognates:
| Spanish | English | Spanish | English | |
| un escritor | a writer | not | un escritante | a writant |
| un jugador | a player | not | un jugante | a playant |
| un comprador | a buyer | not | un comprante | a buyant |
With the above examples, we see that words cannot simply be created at will without consideration for how they might be received by others. It would probably sound odd, for example, were someone to describe a writing utensil such as a pencil or pen as "un escritante" or "a writant." That is, based on the pattern, the word should work in this case; however, from a purely pragmatic standpoint we see that such a word would likely be rejected.
A balance, then, must be stricken between what is possible and what is acceptable. Moreover, this balance is by nature one that changes with time, an idea that can be illustrated by the fact that in Old Spanish, the participial form "comprante" was indeed an acceptable form that has been largely supplanted by "-dor" form listed above. Similarly, in English the word "merchant" might roll off the tongue with ease, but most would likely challenge the use of "merchador." Then again, the similarly rooted word "marketer" would also probably be rejected in the form "marketant." For the most part, the acceptability of either term is rooted largely in tradition, and the introduction of new terms often only occurs with the introduction of a new idea, product, way of looking at the world, etc.
One idea worth noting here is that language should not be viewed as some stagnant or unchanging monolith, but rather, as an organic whole that is constantly growing and changing to suit its environment yet always striving to maintain a relatively stable state, or rather, homeostatic balance. Any change, therefore, will generally be accepted or rejected based on how drastic an effect it has on the currently accepted norms and whether such a change is viewed necessary in terms of adapting to a changing environment.
