Is "place name + er" ("New Yorker") a productive morpheme? [closed]

I know a handful of cities whose denizens can be called "city+er", e.g. Londoner. But is this construction still in active use today and can new demonyms be formed by it?

Solution 1:

Sure. It is perfectly productive, with the fine print indicated in John Lawler's comment, i.e., limited applicability: not every place name will sit happily with the -er suffix. Many will, however; treat yourself to some unexpected examples in this list .

But I have not yet quite proved my thesis. A nice evidence of productiveness of the suffix in English is its applicability to fictional place names. Thus we have a Bucklander (example), a Hogsmeader (example), an Ankh-Morporker (example), etc.