everson at evertype.com
Thu Nov 26 12:00:10 GMT 2009
>> On 26 Du 2009, at 11:25, Michael Everson wrote:
>> don't believe that your preference "lyw/livyow" is really "better"
>> than the regular "liv/livyow".
> On 26 Nov 2009, at 11:30, nicholas williams wrote:
> No, but <lyw> is an attested form. *<liv> is not.
Nicholas, as you well know, KS isn't UCR. It is not merely an
orthographic normalization of written forms in the texts. KS inherits
this feature from the SWF: that in stressed monosyllables [iː] is
written < i > and [ɪ] is written <y>.
If a word has a pronunciation [liːv] then the way to write that in KS
is <liv> (unless it is a bÿs/bës word in which case it would be
Since <lyf> is an attested form, we would regularly re-write this word
as <liv> in KS. It's true that final -v is not very common in the
texts (we might have preferred -f [v] and -ff [f]), but that was one
of the compromises we made.
Yes, there might be liv/lyw pl livyow but it seems to me that the
regular liv has more to recommend it.
liv, livyow 'file'
liv, livyow 'flood'
lyw, lywyow 'colour'
lyw, lywyow 'rudder'
is ambiguous enough without recommending lyw/livyow alongside.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
More information about the Spellyans