<p>The use of function words to do what <em>might otherwise be achieved via inflection</em> is called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periphrasis" rel="noreferrer">periphrasis</a>. The adjectival form is <em>periphrastic</em> (as in <em>periphrastic future tense</em>). I don't think there's a verb.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-27T16:19:19.180Z
Thanks very much! My language uses connect the verb with the function word(s) periphrastically, then inflection to combine multiple function words.
Vir
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-29T17:24:20.367Z
Wiktionary (sourcing Webster's) indicates a verb _to periphrase_ meaning 1. (transitive) to express by periphrase or circumlocution or 2. (intransitive) to use circumlocution,” besides a noun _periphrase_ which is an alternate form of _periphrasis._
Wtrmute
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-27T06:21:54.850Z
2023-08-27T06:21:54.850Z
Greg Nisbet
<h3>Verbum Nullum</h3>
<p><br />
For the examples given, I would argue that none of those are inflexion per se, except &quot;from&quot;. As you note, English does have morphological inflection, but not all grammatical relationships are shown with inflexion.</p>
<p><br />
I would say that &quot;these&quot; simply <strong>modifies</strong> &quot;fish&quot;; but also that I do not think &quot;modify&quot; is being set up as a &quot;non-inflexional synonym&quot;. It modifies the totality of all individual fish by specifying a particular non-singular subset of fish that happen to be in close proximity to the speaker. We can contrast with &quot;those fish&quot; which specifies a particular non-singular subset of fish that happen to be somewhat distant from the speaker. Similarly, we can modify &quot;fish&quot; in other ways by size, by colour, by type, by sex, by gender, etc. So, inflexion is a kind of modification, but not all modifications are inflective.</p>
<p><br />
I would also argue that English does have extramorphological inflexion. For example, we have a rich verbal system, that inflects (morphologically) for basically one person, sometimes for number and sometimes for mood. We also have a somewhat complex system of modal and auxiliary mediated inflexion.</p>
<p><br />
For example:</p>
<ul>
<li>I mought could see to that.</li>
<li>If she had only would've done this...</li>
<li>She done gone spoilt the milk.</li>
</ul>
<p><br />
Your dialect may vary, but I would argue that these modals do in fact count as inflexion for English as much as any Latin synthetic inflexion. Long story short: <strong>English has (at least) two kinds of inflexion</strong>.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-09T07:37:14.290Z
Thank you for the clarifying information. I'm seeking this term because I am writing a grammar for a conlang. I hadn't intended to make my question about English, although I can see I opened that interpretation by using examples from English. I'll edit the question to make it less ambiguous.
Vir
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-09T07:43:35.377Z
On a second look, maybe I'm making a mistake expecting some esoteric technical counterpart to 'inflecting.' Maybe, as well as describing the English situation, 'modifies' is the answer to the title question for linguistics in general.
Vir
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-10T14:57:27.943Z
Are "inflection" and "inflexion" intended to mean something different here?
Karl Knechtel
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-09T04:34:54.280Z
2023-07-26T14:23:42.477Z
2023-07-26T14:23:42.477Z
elemtilas
<p>Edit 2023-08-26: I think this answer is wrong and is superseded by <a href="https://conlang.stackexchange.com/a/2004/1265">this one</a>.</p>
<p>As far as I know, there isn't a dedicated word for adding more words to express grammatical meaning.</p>
<p>I propose <strong>exflect(ion)</strong> by analogy with <strong>inflect(ion)</strong> to fill this gap.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-24T16:21:48.363Z
Sounds reasonable to me. I second the proposal. Thanks for the input!
Vir
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-26T15:37:41.660Z
@Vir there's a real word for this *periphrasis*.
Greg Nisbet
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-27T00:09:58.090Z
@GregNisbet Rather than rewriting this answer, I'd recommend posting "periphrasis" as a new one, so it can be voted up separately and notifies the OP.
Draconis
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-27T06:25:38.247Z
@Draconis It is done. Please leave your comment here because it makes the fact that I have two answers make more sense.
Greg Nisbet
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-15T04:55:00.107Z
2023-08-27T06:24:26.057Z
2023-08-27T06:24:26.057Z
Greg Nisbet
<p>When I indicate noun properties morphologically, I am &quot;inflecting.&quot; When I indicate them with separate words:</p>
<p>fish</p>
<p>this fish</p>
<p>these fish</p>
<p>from these fish</p>
<p>I am not &quot;inflecting.&quot; Is there a similar verb for what more analytical languages do?</p>
<p>Further, to describe this activity accurately, does it matter whether the separate word is itself inflected? e.g., &quot;I inflect <em>this</em>-&gt;<em>these</em> to [insert requested verb] both proximal and plural&quot;?</p>

<terminology><isolating-languages>
Where synthetic languages "inflect," what is the verb for what analytic languages do?
# Where synthetic languages "inflect," what is the verb for what analytic languages do?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-07-08)

When I indicate noun properties morphologically, I am "inflecting." When I indicate them with separate words:

fish

this fish

these fish

from these fish

I am not "inflecting." Is there a similar verb for what more analytical languages do?

Further, to describe this activity accurately, does it matter whether the separate word is itself inflected? e.g., "I inflect *this*->*these* to [insert requested verb] both proximal and plural"?

**Tags:** terminology, isolating-languages


---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2023-08-27. Score: 5 | Accepted answer

The use of function words to do what *might otherwise be achieved via inflection* is called [periphrasis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periphrasis). The adjectival form is *periphrastic* (as in *periphrastic future tense*). I don't think there's a verb.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks very much! My language uses connect the verb with the function word(s) periphrastically, then inflection to combine multiple function words.  
> **username_2**: Wiktionary (sourcing Webster's) indicates a verb _to periphrase_ meaning 1. (transitive) to express by periphrase or circumlocution or 2. (intransitive) to use circumlocution,” besides a noun _periphrase_ which is an alternate form of _periphrasis._  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2023-07-09. Score: 1

### Verbum Nullum

For the examples given, I would argue that none of those are inflexion per se, except "from". As you note, English does have morphological inflection, but not all grammatical relationships are shown with inflexion.

I would say that "these" simply **modifies** "fish"; but also that I do not think "modify" is being set up as a "non-inflexional synonym". It modifies the totality of all individual fish by specifying a particular non-singular subset of fish that happen to be in close proximity to the speaker. We can contrast with "those fish" which specifies a particular non-singular subset of fish that happen to be somewhat distant from the speaker. Similarly, we can modify "fish" in other ways by size, by colour, by type, by sex, by gender, etc. So, inflexion is a kind of modification, but not all modifications are inflective.

I would also argue that English does have extramorphological inflexion. For example, we have a rich verbal system, that inflects (morphologically) for basically one person, sometimes for number and sometimes for mood. We also have a somewhat complex system of modal and auxiliary mediated inflexion.

For example:

* I mought could see to that.
* If she had only would've done this...
* She done gone spoilt the milk.

Your dialect may vary, but I would argue that these modals do in fact count as inflexion for English as much as any Latin synthetic inflexion. Long story short: **English has (at least) two kinds of inflexion**.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you for the clarifying information. I'm seeking this term because I am writing a grammar for a conlang. I hadn't intended to make my question about English, although I can see I opened that interpretation by using examples from English. I'll edit the question to make it less ambiguous.  
> **username_0**: On a second look, maybe I'm making a mistake expecting some esoteric technical counterpart to 'inflecting.' Maybe, as well as describing the English situation, 'modifies' is the answer to the title question for linguistics in general.  
> **username_4**: Are "inflection" and "inflexion" intended to mean something different here?  

---

### Answer by username_1 on 2023-08-15. Score: 0

Edit 2023-08-26: I think this answer is wrong and is superseded by [this one](https://conlang.stackexchange.com/a/2004/1265).

As far as I know, there isn't a dedicated word for adding more words to express grammatical meaning.

I propose **exflect(ion)** by analogy with **inflect(ion)** to fill this gap.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Sounds reasonable to me. I second the proposal. Thanks for the input!  
> **username_1**: @username_0 there's a real word for this *periphrasis*.  
> **username_5**: @username_1 Rather than rewriting this answer, I'd recommend posting "periphrasis" as a new one, so it can be voted up separately and notifies the OP.  
> **username_1**: @username_5 It is done. Please leave your comment here because it makes the fact that I have two answers make more sense.  

---

