[Spellyans] del 'leaves' and dèl/dell 'so, as'

[Daniel Prohaska]

Ray, 

I would stress <won> and <ta> in that sentence; never <del>.

Dan

 

  _____  

From: Ray Chubb
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 10:57 AM



 

 

On 13 Kev 2008, at 19:12, <ajtrim at msn.com> <ajtrim at msn.com> wrote:





Thanks, Daniel.

 

I think that explains why unstressed "so" is <del> in the SWF.

Sooo, it does follow the SWF rules, after all.

 

Sooo, is it always unstressed?

 

In the regularly used phrase 'Del won yn ta' it would be stressed.





If "so" is stressed, as it is in my two sentences above (and this one too),
do we spell it <dell>, or does the vowel become long?

 

Certainly in English, "so" is often stressed. Of course, Cornish is not
English.

 

What do we do in KS???

I still think that <dell> would be best for KS.

 

 

Regards,

 

Andrew  J. Trim

 

 

 

From: Daniel <mailto:daniel at ryan-prohaska.com>  Prohaska

Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 4:09 PM

To: 'Standard <mailto:spellyans at kernowek.net>  Cornish discussion list'

Subject: Re: [Spellyans]del 'leaves' and dèl/dell 'so, as'

 

It’s <del> and <war> in the SWF because they are unstressed. Just like
<gwedhen> is spelt <gwedhen> and not **gwedhenn. The SWF rule is that
consonants are not doubled in unstressed syllables. E.g. <rag> is /rag/ when
unstressed, but /ra:g/ when in stressed in the sentence, i.e. usually when
it’s used as an adverb rather than a preposition.

Dan

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Everson
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 3:20 PM

 

"In the SWF and KS we have a rule that in monosyllables a vowel is short
before -ll. So the expected form of the word 'so, as' is <dell>, just like
<pell> 'long'. We can distinguish <del> 'leaves' and <dèl> 'so, as', but why
not <dell>? <Dell> also happens to be the form in KK. Why do we have <del>
for 'so, as' in the SWF?

 

Ray Chubb told me that Albert Bock had argued against <del> (our <dèl>)
because it would imply that we ought to write <warr> 'on'. We write <wàr>,
but in terms of orthography design I think Albert's view is incorrect. Yes,
both *<warr> and <dell> follow the rule and give nice predictable short
vowels. But <dell> occurs 152 times in the corpus, so there's certainly no
reason to avoid it. True, we don't like <warr> which contrasts with <war>
[wæ:r] 'beware'. But in good orthography design we should use the
predictable rule whenever possible and mark only exceptions.

 

I think we should write <dell> and not <dèl> in Kernowek Standard."

 

 

 

  _____  

 

_______________________________________________
Spellyans mailing list
Spellyans at kernowek.net
http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
_______________________________________________
Spellyans mailing list
Spellyans at kernowek.net
http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net

 

Ray Chubb

 

Portreth

Kernow

 





 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20081214/2def648f/attachment.htm>