[Spellyans] <dh> ~ <th>
craig at agantavas.org
Mon Nov 29 09:53:16 GMT 2010
In view of the uncertain evidence, it is probably best to leave the
spelling of numerals exactly as we already have them. This has not
been a contentious item in the revival.
On 29 Du 2010, at 09:46, nicholas williams wrote:
> I think not, Owen. The generalisation of au•dhak in the preceding
> surely makes pem•dhak more likely i.e. with the same ending. The
> mere fact that people who had
> heard traditional Cornish said pemp•thak is good enough evidence for
> Pymthek is correct, I believe, not *pemdhak (pace Lhuyd).
> On 2010 Du 29, at 04:34, Owen Cook wrote:
>> They had also generalized the ending "au•dhak" for the first three.
>> Given such a deformation in these numerals, the devoicing of the
>> fricative in pemp•thak is hardly a shocker. The evidence I've seen
>> this number all seems to point, if anything, to /pempðek/.
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
More information about the Spellyans