English forms as killjoy and marplot also illustrate the compounding of a verb and a noun, but the resulting word has a strictly nominal, not a verbal, function.  We cannot say he marplots.  Some languages allow the composition of all or nearly all types of elements.  Paiute, for instance, may compound noun with noun, adjective with noun, verb with noun to make a noun, noun with verb to make a verb, adverb with verb, verb with verb.  Yana, an Indian language of California, can freely compound noun with noun and verb with noun, but not verb with verb.  On the other hand, Iroquois can compound only noun with verb, never noun and noun as in English or verb and verb as in so many other languages.  Finally, each language has its characteristic types of order of composition.  In English the qualifying element regularly precedes; in certain other languages it follows.  Sometimes both types are used in the same language, as in Yana, where “beef” is “bitter-venison” but “deer-liver” is expressed by “liver-deer.”  The compounded object of a verb precedes the verbal element in Paiute, Nahuatl, and Iroquois, follows it in Yana, Tsimshian,[29] and the Algonkin languages.

[Footnote 28:  The language of the Aztecs, still spoken in large parts of Mexico.]

[Footnote 29:  Indian language of British Columbia closely related to the Nass already cited.]

Of all grammatical processes affixing is incomparably the most frequently employed.  There are languages, like Chinese and Siamese, that make no grammatical use of elements that do not at the same time possess an independent value as radical elements, but such languages are uncommon.  Of the three types of affixing—­the use of prefixes, suffixes, and infixes—­suffixing is much the commonest.  Indeed, it is a fair guess that suffixes do more of the formative work of language than all other methods combined.  It is worth noting that there are not a few affixing languages that make absolutely no use of prefixed elements but possess a complex apparatus of suffixes.  Such are Turkish, Hottentot, Eskimo, Nootka, and Yana.  Some of these, like the three last mentioned, have hundreds of suffixed elements, many of them of a concreteness of significance that would demand expression in the vast majority of languages by means of radical elements.  The reverse case, the use of prefixed elements to the complete exclusion of suffixes, is far less common.  A good example is Khmer (or Cambodgian), spoken in French Cochin-China, though even here there are obscure traces of old suffixes that have ceased to function as such and are now felt to form part of the radical element.