Analyzing Ungrammaticality of "Grammarismian"

The question asks to identify the reasons for the ungrammaticality of the word grammarismian, based on the classification of its suffixes.

Suffix Classification

Let's examine the suffixes involved:

• Base word: grammar
• Suffix 1: -ism. This suffix typically forms abstract nouns denoting a system, doctrine, or practice (e.g., capitalism). It is generally considered a secondary affix as it attaches to existing words (nouns, adjectives).
• Suffix 2: -ian. This suffix typically denotes a person associated with something (e.g., historian) or forms adjectives. When following a suffix like -ism, it is also typically considered a secondary affix.

Evaluating the Options

The word grammarismian suggests the structure: grammar + -ism + -ian.

• Option A: -ian is a primary affix. In standard English morphology, -ian is typically secondary when following suffixes like -ism. Classifying it as primary in this context is incorrect and contributes to the ungrammaticality. Primary affixes usually attach directly to root words.
• Option B: -ism is a primary affix. This is incorrect; -ism is typically a secondary affix.
• Option C: -ian is a secondary affix. This statement is generally correct for the position following -ism. However, the correct answer implies this statement alone doesn't fully explain the ungrammaticality in conjunction with other factors.
• Option D: -ism is a secondary affix. This statement is correct. The suffix -ism attaches to the base grammar to form grammarism. This correct classification is a necessary part of understanding the structure.

Reasoning for Correct Options (A and D)

The ungrammaticality arises from the incorrect application or understanding of affix rules:

1. Correct Classification (D): It's crucial that -ism is recognized as a secondary affix, forming grammarism from grammar.
2. Incorrect Premise (A): The word becomes ungrammatical likely because -ian is *not* a primary affix in this sequence. Treating it as primary, after a secondary affix (-ism), violates standard morphological rules for suffix ordering and type. The combination of grammar + secondary(-ism) + incorrectly applied primary(-ian) leads to the ungrammatical form.

Therefore, the options that explain the ungrammaticality focus on the correct classification of -ism as secondary (D) and the problematic classification of -ian as primary (A) in this specific word formation context.