[Spellyans] SWF questionable wordforms

nicholas williams njawilliams at gmail.com
Thu Sep 11 08:00:10 IST 2008


What you say may be true, but the expected form is *Kernewek <  
*Kornowika with i-affection of the ow > ew.

Nicholas


On 10 Sep 2008, at 17:41, Daniel Prohaska wrote:

> No, I don’t think this is the case. Notice that Lhuyd gives the  
> pronunciation kloüaz and toula with <ou> and not with <û>. He gives  
> Kernûak, which means it goes with the words with original <ow>, like  
> lowen and Jowan. Hence Kernowek is the correct word form and it  
> cannot e assumed that *Kernewek was ever correct for any time  
> period, even before the shift from ew to ow.
> Dan
>
> From: nicholas williams
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:44 PM
>
>
> Surely Kernowek (Cornowok 1572) is a development of *Kernowek by the  
> rule stressed ew > ow in disyllables and polysyllables; cf. clowes,  
> towlel, etc.
> This development appears early in written Cornish, cf. Ihesus crist  
> leun a bete a leueris zen dowzek PA 49a.
>
> Nicholas
>
>
> On 9 Sep 2008, at 09:46, Michael Everson wrote:
>
>
> and Breton Kerneveg, but a new formation based on Kernow + -ek. It  
> seems the consistent SWF spelling ought to be Kernowek with an  
> earlier pronunciation [kEr”nOUwEk] and a later [k at r”nu:@k]
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20080911/20fb6b8b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Spellyans mailing list