On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:14:15 -0700, Donald J. HARLOW <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

snip
>>The "-icx" suffix was proposed (by various speakers) for that, and
>>it has been used and is still sometimes seen. But it didn't really
>>take root. It's hard to say why, since nothing prevents such an
>>addition to Esperanto.
>
>Right, as it would be almost strictly cosmetic. I guess nobody really
>feels the need. (Generally, the proponents of such a modification are
>men, who feel that they are protecting the fine sensitivities of the
>poor Esperanto-speaking woman. In general, the poor
>Esperanto-speaking woman could give a sh*t.)

I said in a previous post that it would affect prior Eo by actually
changing the meaning of words. Patro would mean 'parent.' But
maybe that wouldn't be all that unsettling. Anyhow, I don't like
the esthetics of icx, either. In Texperanto I used -ero, and changed
the original -ero to -isko.
>
>>I come across the "na" particle in use from time to time, but it's
>>too soon to say whether it will become widespread.
>
>Not really. I'd be glad to make a prediction, with 99.9% confidence
>that I'd be right.

As somebody mentioned previously, the idea of using it to mark
foreign names and other words that just don't feel right adding
-on to might be the most useful function for it. And those iom
constructions, which always seemed incomplete to me — they
definitely rely on word order for clarity:

iom da hundoj mordis mi.