[Spellyans] redistribution of <i> and <y>

nicholas williams njawilliams at gmail.com
Wed Jul 23 11:16:48 IST 2008


In unstressed syllables there is no difference in pronunciation  
between, say, -in in kegyn and -yn in brentyn. Even KK (which spells  
"etymologically") admits that unstressed i and y are not to be  
distinguished. Moreover the texts always spell MC <brentyn>,  
<bryntyn>. There are no exx of *<brentin>. The name for "Constantine"  
is common in BM, where it is spelt <Costentyn> at least 20 times. It  
never has final <-in>. The only time the name has <in> is in the Latin  
form <Constantinus> in stage directions.  To attempt to distinguish  
kegyn from *brentin, *Costentin in spelling is not wise. It will make  
learning the orthography much harder and with no phonetic gain. It  
will merely look like an attempt to salvage a feature of KK, which was  
misguided in the first place. The SWF should write kegyn, Costentyn,  
brentyn, melyn, gyllyn, etc.
Notice incidentally, that following KK the SWF at the moment writes  
gyllyn, gyllys, gyllyns but gylli!

Nicholas
-----------
On 23 Jul 2008, at 08:40, Daniel Prohaska wrote:

> I would like to hear everyone’s opinions on the following idea for  
> redistributing <y> and <i> in the SWF. I would write <i> where  
> bother Late and Middle Cornish have /i/ and /i:/, and write <y> ~  
> <e> (in dictionaries <ÿ> ~ <ë>) where Middle Cornish has /I/ and / 
> I:/, but Late Cornish has /e/ and /e:/.
>
> Examples:
> SWF <brentin>; RMC /”brentin/, RLC /”brentin/;
> SWF <kegyn>; RMC /”kegin/, RLC /”keg at n/;
> SWF <tir>; RMC /ti:r/, RLC /ti:r/;
> SWF <bys> ~ <bes>; RMC */bI:z/ = [bi:z] ~ [bIz] ~ [beIz] etc., RLC / 
> be:z/;
>
> Dan
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Everson
> Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 11:31 PM
>
> At 21:46 +0100 2008-07-20, Craig Weatherhill wrote:
> >Good question - if <y> is a short i and <i> a long one, then this  
> makes
> >no sense at all.
>
> “That is the SWF (and KS) rule for monosyllables. In KS we are  
> making an attempt to rationalize (and make teachable) the  
> distribution of <i> and <y>.
>
> Nicholas and I tried many times to have this distribution dealt with
> during the AHG meetings when we were asked our advice. Our concerns
> were not addressed. Not even acknowledged.
> --
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com”
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20080723/929f1988/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Spellyans mailing list