Affixes V: -ig-, -igx-, -ebl-, -ind-, -end-

-ig- takes whatever the root means and makes you the one who brings it about. From morti, to die, you get mortigi, to kill. From plena, full, comes plenigi, to fill. From libera comes liberigi, and from halti, to come to a stop, comes haltigi, to stop something else. The result is almost always a transitive verb in -i, and it now demands an object where the plain root wanted none.

The trap is the pairing with -iĝ-. Halti and haltigi are not interchangeable: the cart halts, the driver halts the cart. Get the pair the wrong way round and you have said the opposite of what you meant. Igi also stands alone as an ordinary verb, as in igi lin veni, to make him come, which is the escape hatch when a root refuses the suffix comfortably.

-iĝ- is the mirror of -ig-: nobody does it to you, you simply end up in the state the root names. Fari is to make, fariĝi is to become. Sidi is to be sitting, sidiĝi is to sit down. Levi is to lift, leviĝi is to rise. Edzo gives edziĝi, to get married. The result is always an intransitive verb, and it cannot take an object.

Two things catch learners out. Naski is to give birth, so naskiĝi is to be born, and the two are easy to swap under pressure. And -iĝ- is not the passive: la pordo malfermiĝis says the door came open, with no hand implied, while la pordo estis malfermita says somebody opened it. Choose by whether an agent exists.

-ebl- hangs on a transitive verb root and gives you an adjective in -a: vidi gives videbla, kredi gives kredebla, legi gives legebla, trinki gives trinkebla. Ebla itself stands alone as the adjective for possible, and eble is the everyday word for perhaps.

The nuance worth holding on to is that -ebl- is passive. A legebla libro is a book that can be read, not a book that reads; the root's action is done to the thing, never by it. That is why it wants a transitive root and sits awkwardly on iri or dormi.

It heads a family of three. -ebl- says it can be done, -ind- says it is worth doing, -end- says it must be done. Same slot, rising pressure.

-ind- says the thing deserves to have the root done to it. Legi gives leginda, worth reading; vidi gives vidinda, worth seeing; miri gives mirinda, worth wondering at, which is how Esperanto arrives at wonderful. The result is an adjective in -a, and inda also stands alone, taking je for what the thing is worthy of.

Watch the two commonest members, because both have drifted. Kompatinda and bedaŭrinda are no longer felt as worth pitying and worth regretting; they are simply pitiable and regrettable, and nobody hears the machinery any more.

Against its neighbours: videbla means it can be seen, vidinda means it repays the trip, videnda means you are obliged to go. Judgement, not capacity, is what -ind- adds.

-end- is the hardest of the three obligation suffixes. Pagi gives pagenda, needing to be paid; fari gives farenda; solvi gives solvenda; lerni gives lernenda. The result is an adjective in -a, and like its two cousins it wants a transitive root, because the duty falls on the thing, not on the doer.

Ranked, the family runs -ebl- can be done, -ind- is worth doing, -end- must be done. Nothing in the word says who is imposing the duty, which is exactly why forms and notices like it.

Two cautions. It is not in the Fundamento, so it is unofficial, though it is universally read. And legenda, worth reading aloud in your head before you write it, collides visually with legend. In speech most people simply say oni devas pagi and leave the suffix to paperwork.