[Spellyans] th/dh and mutation

Daniel Prohaska daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Mon Nov 22 14:17:33 GMT 2010

Ray, this is an interesting question and I haven’t responded to it because I don’t know the answer and haven’t had the time to check. I had previously found two examples of <tus tha> in TH, so this may suggest (!!!careful, just a hypothesis, not yet worked out!!!) that lenition may have occurred following <s> from historical /d/, but not from original <s>. But to give you a brief answer: I don’t know.



-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Chubb
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 11:03 AM

“No one has responded to this so I have done some checks of my own.  It seems to me that even after feminine nouns in the texts with final 'th' where there is general agreement that the sound should be 'dh' the mutation rule still applies.


Therefore it could be said that one of the unfortunate by-products of George's introduction of final 'dh' is that it has caused bad grammar when revivalists drop the t,c,p, and d rule.


On 21 Du 2010, at 12:57, Ray Chubb wrote:

> I am afraid I have not had time to read all the discussion on this  

> topic in depth.  However there is something that worries me and this  

> came to the fore when I served on the Kerrier signage panel.


> We are aware that according to the rules of grammar for modern  

> Cornish final 'th' in a feminine noun stops mutation of a following  

> t,c,p or d, if we are to change a number of Unified 'th's to 'dh's  

> should this mutation rule still apply or not?



> Ray Chubb


> Portreth

> Kernow”


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20101122/58accc5f/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Spellyans mailing list