[Spellyans] SWF questionable wordforms

Daniel Prohaska daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Thu Sep 11 11:26:22 IST 2008

Not if we assume it could be a new formation based on the base kernow + -ek.
The late attestation seems to be in favour of this assumption. Anyway, the
Late Cornish forms appear to be in the same set as lowen and Jowan rather
than clewes and tewlel.




From: nicholas williams
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 9:00 AM


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





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.




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.





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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20080911/9508a5b6/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Spellyans mailing list