[Spellyans] -ita

nicholas williams njawilliams at gmail.com
Mon Jun 30 15:06:19 IST 2008


KK is incoherent in its spelling of words in -ita/-yta < Latin - 
itat(em).
It writes <trynyta> 'trinity', <cheryta> 'charity', <dynyta> 'dignity'  
with <-yta> but
<kontroversita> 'controversy', <antikwita> 'antiquity' and <awtorita>  
'authority' with <-ita>.

The SWF (as exemplified in Dan's dictionary) renders the ending as <- 
ita> everywhere.
I wonder whether this is wise. The vowel in -yta is invariably short.  
I should prefer to write
trynyta, cheryta, dynyta, controversyta, antyqwyta, auctoryta, etc.

Otherwise we might have the following:

akwyt a! 'pay him!'
kwyt a! 'leave him!'
antikwita 'antiquity'
dibita 'pitiless'

all with [It@] but written differently. This isn't very helpful for  
learners—many of whom (understandably)
found the distribution of y and i baffling in KK.

And it is not just learners who were befuddled by <i ~ y> in KK. The  
editor of the KK New Testament in his introduction describes his team  
of translators as 'experienced Cornish linguists'. They wrote in KK  
and yet they, 'experienced' as they were, could frequently not decide  
whether to write <i> or <y>.
In An Testament Nowydh we find <Symeon> Luke 2.25 but <Simeon> Acts  
13:1; <Sylvanus> 2 Cor. 1:19 but <Silvanus> 1 Peter 5:12; <Sidon> Matt  
11:21 but <Sydon> Mark 3:8.

Should we not be looking for a simple and coherent distribution of  
these two graphs <i> and <y>?

Nicholas





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20080630/dfd8d54f/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Spellyans mailing list