[Spellyans] MAGA newsletter 2008.12 - again!
njawilliams at gmail.com
Sat Dec 6 18:08:41 GMT 2008
I shoud say Hemma a veu an kensa novel gans Myghal Palmer or Hemma a
veu an kensa novel scrifys gans Myghal Palmer.
The preterite is necessary here, because the novel's publication is
being thought of as a single past event.
It is like Tregear's thegen heveleb ny eff a rug Eva an kynsa benyn
bethqueth a ve TH 2a.
I can find no example of either hemma a ve or hem a ve, but Tregear
whath hemma a vea sufficient lowre TH 50a where the verb is
conditional. He also writes: henna a ve gesys ha na moy vsyys TH 52a,
where henna not hen occurs before a veu. I think that hemma/hebma a
veu is probably correct.
Incidentally both hemma yw and hem yw are attested. Hemma yw is the
more common. The figures are:
hem yv 1
hem yw 1
hem ew 1
hemma yv 6
hemma yw 1
hemma ew 23
helma yv 4.
Hem yw was certainly well known because in SA one finds: kemerogh,
debbr(ogh), hem ew ow corff ve SA 62a, which would have been
know to people as a Cornish version of Hoc est corpus meum in the mass.
I can find one example of hemma o and none of hem o.
On 6 Dec 2008, at 16:16, Ray Chubb wrote:
> This is the English, (which will appear in the latest edition of the
> S a G catalogue), which I was attempting to translate: This is the
> late Myghal Palmer's first novel.
> On 6 Kev 2008, at 11:13, nicholas williams wrote:
>> Below is my preferred rendering.
>> Except that it might have been better to say: Hemm a veu an kensa
>> novel gans Myghal Palmer.
>> On 5 Dec 2008, at 23:23, Eddie Climo wrote:
>>>> Hemm o an kensa novel gans Myghal Palmer ....
>> Spellyans mailing list
>> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> Ray Chubb
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Spellyans