[Spellyans] Normalization of words in -ak and -ek
everson at evertype.com
Wed Jun 3 23:25:49 BST 2009
On 3 Jun 2009, at 23:05, Eddie Climo wrote:
>> On balance I suggest the following normalization:
>> KS -ak, -ogyon, -ogeth, -egy, -ogyl, -oges, -ogesow,
> A more balanced suggestion would be
> KS -ek
> as that is used by 3 out of the 4 varieties of RC. To accommodate
> those who prefer LC forms, this could be expanded to:
> KS -ek (MC form
> KS -ak (LC form)
We aren't making an MC/LC distinction for -ak and -ek, both of which
are pronounced identically, [ək].
We're making an orthographic distinction, where -ak is used where the
plural stem changes to -og-, and -ek where the plural stem remains -eg-.
Why? Because right now there's no help for learners. Some -ak words in
some varieties of RC are -og- some are -eg-. And some -ek words in
some varieties of RC are -og- some are -eg-. See, it works out very
well to keep to -ak/-og- and -ek/-eg- -- it's only that this
particular word, perhednak/perhennak, has been difficult to classify,
because the only evidence we have for it is one singular in -ek (BM)
and one singular in -ak (BK).
That's why I also did the analysis of all the RC varieties. The choice
of which to choose (-ek or -ak) was not on the basis of statistical
frequency of the masculine for only. If we did that, then we would
have had an -eg- word. But since the greater number of derivative
forms in RC are in -og-, we have good cause to choose the BK spelling
> And the economical thing about this MC/LC alternation is that
> there'd be no call for yet another diacritic!
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
More information about the Spellyans