ful and less adjectives

[THEWINNER]

Is there any rule to write or not write ful & less adjectives?
:-(

 

[Tdol]

I am not sure exactly what you mean- do you mean where there is only one form?

 

[Raymott]

Is there any rule to write or not write ful & less adjectives?
:-(

I think you are asking whether there is any rule that tells you when you can add them to a noun to make an adjective.
No, there isn't, that I know of.
You can't say, for example, that a person here who has lots of answers is an "answerful" person. And there's no rule about why you can't say that.
It's possible to coin words (usually with -less) if that word stem has been used, but it usually has a comical effect.

A: Do you have any books? I need something to read.
B: No, I'm completely bookless at the moment. (Not advised!)

 

[BobK]

...The last sentence would justify the coining of 'answerful', for comic effect.

One thing to be aware of is that the suffix doesn't always have the same meaning. A 'hopeful' person may be said to be full of hope (but even here I have my doubts, as the 'fullness' is only for one thing - not a general optimism); but a useful knife isn't full of use - unless it's a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Army_knife: and a fretful baby is not full of fret (which isn't even a noun, nowadays - although in some dialects people still use the expression 'in a fret' to mean 'disturbed')... And as for a wistful or baleful glance, all bets are off! ;-)

Similarly, a motherless child has no mother; but a fruitless exercise has nothing to do with fruit; a wireless router doesn't have no wires (the connections it can make don't use wires, which is not the same) ....

b

PS Informally, 'needful' can be used to mean 'that which is needed' - it doesn't mean 'full of need', for which there is the word 'needy'. This usage seems to me to be dying out, but older people may still talk about 'doing the needful'.