Why *-ling-in? The pertinacity of a wrong gender

Co-occurrence restrictions among affixes are preferably accounted for through GENERAL structural constraints, to do with separations of word-internal domains, with hierarchical rankings of the affixes involved, with processing complexity, or with word-prosodic patterns. Disallowing PARTICULAR designated affixes to combine with one another by (language-particular) stipulation is considered a theoretical option only to be taken as a last resort. Against this backdrop it is argued here that in the much-discussed German case of diminutive-pejorative-absolutive suffix -ling the preclusion of further derivational affixation, in particular suffixation with feminine motional -in, is not due to any such general constraint; rather, this must be recognised as an instance of an affix-specific selectional restriction of a morphosemantic kind. The chief theoretical interest of this particular case is diachronic . While inner suffix -ling, originally a semantically neutral nominalising suffix, was able to acquire a diminutive, pejorative, absolutive-aligned ("passive") semantics, its original gender remained masculine rather than changing to neuter, as would be semantically more suitable. Thus, with the outer, feminine-deriving suffix -in being sensitive to the gender of its nominal bases, nouns which are formally masculine, as required by -in suffixation, but on semantic grounds ought to be neuter are infelicitous.