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

Craig Weatherhill weatherhill at freenet.co.uk
Wed Jul 23 14:20:34 IST 2008


How come the SWF gives "yellow" as <melyn>, when the evidence would seem 
to suggest it be <melen>?  Until now, and in long use, <melyn> has been 
"mill".

Craig



nicholas williams wrote:
> 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 <mailto:Spellyans at kernowek.net>
>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>> _______________________________________________
>> Spellyans mailing list
>> Spellyans at kernowek.net <mailto: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
>   





More information about the Spellyans mailing list