[Spellyans] 2nd pl imperative

nicholas williams njawilliams at gmail.com
Tue Feb 17 14:22:56 GMT 2009

The stressed vowel of gureuh has affected the unstressed vowel of  

I collected 26 imperatives from OM in -eugh and 14 forms in -ough and - 
ugh. I then binned them by accident.
Many of the -eugh forms were preceded by eugh 'go', with a stressed ew  
which may have affected the spelling of unstressed -eugh.
The pres-fut and pres subj also have unstressed -eugh, -ough and -ugh  
in OM, though they are much less commonly attested anyway.

The plural imperative geseugh, gesough has the following forms in the  

geseugh x 2
gesough x 5
gesogh x 3
gesowgh x 4
gesow x 20
gesugh x 3.

I think to attempt to distinguish imperative -ewgh from indicative - 
owgh is futile and inauthentic.


On 17 Feb 2009, at 13:58, Michael Everson wrote:

> Even in Lhuyd we find (AB 246b-c)
> Gweloh, huî ụeloh huî odzhi' a guelez, and † there huî guelez,  
> Ye see (present)
> Gueleụh or gureuh ụelez, See ye
> I would guess at this stage that Lhuyd is the source for what Jenner  
> would write gwelough and gweleugh.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20090217/75f4eb9d/attachment.html>

More information about the Spellyans mailing list