[Spellyans] -ita

A. J. Trim ajtrim at msn.com
Tue Jul 1 14:23:01 IST 2008

I looked at the discussion list, as suggested.
I did not find many problems there.
Clearly, the list of <y-> words is short and can easily be learnt.

I did not see any words starting <î->. Do we really need <î->?

Is ilyn "limpid" one of these? (îlyn)

I have seen yredy in the texts, does iredy also occur?

Should iwys "indeed" be ywys?; and should iwyn "yew" be ywyn?

I did not see ytho "therefore". Will that start with <i->?

The word for "is" is given as yw. Will ew be an alternative?
yu (mainly as yv) and ew are much more common in the traditional texts than 


Andrew J. Trim

From: "Michael Everson" <everson at evertype.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 8:26 AM
To: "Standard Cornish discussion list" <spellyans at kernowek.net>
Subject: Re: [Spellyans] -ita

> At 23:36 +0100 2008-06-30, A. J. Trim wrote:
>>Yes, I think you have it about right in KS,
>>regarding <i> and <y>, though I'm still not sure
>>about bÿs/bës words.
> I don't know what you are unsure about.
>>Why are despit and constrin quoted as
>>exceptions? Surely, these have stressed <i> =
>>[i:], and so are regular.
> They are not monosyllables.
>>I would also expect [I@] and [i:@] to be <ia>
>>(e.g. fia "to flee"), and [ja] to be <ya>(e.g.
>>redya "to read") and I would expect final <-y>,
>>e.g. tyby "to suppose", chy "house".
>>Initial <i> would be OK but there are exceptions
>>(e.g. yw "is", y "his", yma/ymons, ytho).
> Yes.
>>These will need to be in a very short list else
>>they will need to be predictable -- "function"
>>word is too vague a term.
> We provide an exhaustive list. It isn't all that long.
>>What happens when a word starts with <gy-> or
>><gi-> under soft mutation? Does it become <y->
>>or <i-> respectively, or do they all become <i->?
> The root vowel is preserved.
>>How do we know whether yn gwir is "truly" (with
>>missing mutation) or in gwir "in truth", and
>>does "in truth" mean "truly" anyway?
> Because the particle we spell in KS as <yn>
> mutates and the preposition <in> does not.
>>I can live with it, if that is what you want to
>>do, but I think that I would prefer not to have
>>this initial <i> rule. It appears to be cosmetic
>>only and without function.
> Nance used initial <y> only.
> George took that as his base and changed some
> words to initial <i> on the basis of his theories
> and etymologies.
> Gendall (I think) uses initial <i> only.
> In KS Nancians will find plenty of <y> in KS.
> More than many Gendallians might prefer, but the
> reasons for them are coherent. There's no real
> argument against initial <i> from the Nancian
> point of view. Please see
> http://www.evertype.com/kernowek/ahg-discussion-initial-i-y.pdf
> for a discussion and a list of words (all the
> words in George's dictionaries).
> -- 
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net

More information about the Spellyans mailing list