njawilliams at gmail.com
Thu Nov 18 18:38:32 GMT 2010
With all due respect George has no theory. He says of the voicing/devoicing in stressed and unstressed syllables:
"it is a phonetic problem, and one which cannot be solved in the absence of traditional Cornish speakers" (KKC21: 157). That is not a theory.
It is an admission that he cannot explain the matter—which did not by the way stop his overthrowing the accepted orthography of Cornish and splitting the revival.
My view is that the lenis after an unstressed vowel was devoiced and was voiced after a stressed one.
This is systematic and affects p/b. k/g, th/dh and f/dh.
When I suggested writing th for dh I meant only that dhe was not part of the inventory of traditional Cornish. I never suggested, as you know perfectly well, that the medial segment in cotha 'older' and cotha/codha 'to fall' were the same.
You have come nowhere near to convincing me that I am mistaken.
You have suggested no coherent and systematic reason for Lhuyd's variations. guironedh/guironeth, nowydh/noweth.
You have suggested no explanation for such forms as sewenaffa and genaffa in CW.
You haven't suggested why the texts regularly write geneff, etc.
Your only example not from Lhuyd is gwreanathe in CW, which as I have pointed out, proves nothing—since CW also writes whathe, Sethe, forsothe, etc., where the final segment must be voiceless.
Lhuyd is useful, but he is not infallible. He writes uarnav and genev. But such forms with final v after an unstressed vowel occur in his writing only and nowhere else in the remains of Cornish. On the other hand, though they are not common, examples of final v after a stressed vowel are found sporadically and in increasing numbers from the Ordinalia onwards.
Traditional Cornish sometimes writes ov 'I am', nev 'heaven', ev 'he'. Traditional Cornish never writes warnav or genev. How do you explain that?
It seems to me that you are trying to defend final unstressed dh and v only because they are in KK and therefore in SWF.
But in recent times the first person to change myghterneth to myghterneth and genef to genev was KG and he can't explain why.
You will forgive me for not agreeing to write gwiryonedh and genev.
I will not write forms that I believe to be wrong.
On 2010 Du 18, at 18:13, Daniel Prohaska wrote:
> that your theory is right and Ken George’s theory is wrong, not when we have so little to go by.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Spellyans