[Spellyans] <dh> ~ <th>

Craig Weatherhill 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  
> numerals
> 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  
> me.
> Pymthek is correct, I believe, not *pemdhak (pace Lhuyd).
> Nicholas
> 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  
>> for
>> this number all seems to point, if anything, to /pempðek/.
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net

Craig Weatherhill

More information about the Spellyans mailing list