[Spellyans] Nicholas' review of the SWF Glossary (A-D)

Daniel Prohaska daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Sun Aug 14 12:37:10 IST 2011

Thank you so much for taking the time to go through the SWF Glossary. This is extremely helpful. I realise that the Glossary as well as codifying the SWF is still work in progress and that the choices of words to include in the Glossary as well as some lexical choices may seem arbitrary. This has to do with the ‘mission statement’ of using available Cornish beginners’ language teaching materials. I have used this ‘excuse’ several times in my intercalated answers below, though it is in many cases vocabulary that has been in use in RC for many decades and would be difficult to justify exclusion on the grounds that the words are not always or sparsely attested in the texts. We have compromised in the sense that we include established and much used words that we found in the beginners’ course material. The SWF is inclusive and several ideologies have to be reconciled in it. Many developments in RC are reactions to previous attempts at codifying the language. Nance reacted to Jenner’s Late Cornish based variety by going further into the past and concentrated on early Middle Cornish. Nicholas, your, I should almost say preference, for loan words is a reaction to the excessive purism that has been part of the lexical ‘Ausbau’ (and ‘Umbau’) of Cornish for the past 80 years, while George reacted to Nance’s preference in ‘mining’ Welsh for loans and loan translations by looking towards Breton, and Gendall reacted to Nance’s overuse of the letter <y> by getting rid of it altogether despite its being well attested in the LC material. The SWF has a lot to reconcile and consider, but this is the nature of the beast. These tendencies and ideologies would be interesting to analyse but a first year learners’ glossary is hardly the place.
In pretty much all cases I can agree that the words you cite should be included in a comprehensive dictionary of Cornish, but the Glossary is intended for first year learners and cannot go overboard with including every possible words, especially if it is not in general use in RC today.
Again, thanks. I will respond to the other letters when I get round to looking at them in detail.
Review of SWF Glossary
For ‘activity’ the glossary gives gwrians, plural *gwriansow. Gwrians has no plural. The same error has been made s.v. DEED
Your GSK06 gives the plural gwryansow in four instances. Since there are many words attested only in the singular or in the plural, I believe it to be legitimate to derive (‘reconstruct’, ‘form’, ‘invent’) an appropriate singular or plural if it can be useful in RC. I will advise against omitting the plural form.
For ‘afflicted’ the glossary gives plegys. The verbal adj. of plagya is plagys:
lemyn yth oma plagys CW 1576
a vyth plagys creys za ve CW 1615.
Why is not grevya cited? It occurs 13 times.
Yes, <plagys> should be written for **plegys. 
Grevya was likely not cited because it didn’t occur in any of the wordlists given in the beginners’ courses used to compile the SWF glossary.
For ‘get angry’ the glossary gives serri; kemeres sorr. It omits angra:
worth Ihesus rag y angre PA 195c
der henna me a angras CW 1683
Assof engrys BK 2156
yw engrez Rowe.
Angra was not omitted. Angra was likely not cited because it didn’t occur in any of the wordlists given in the beginners’ courses used to compile the SWF glossary.
sorr is usually used with don, not kemeres:
Na thegough sor yn golon PA 37a
na thegovgh sor yn colon PC 539.
I can't find any example of kemeres sorr at the moment.
Yes, I would recommend we change that.
BTW, you cite kemeres sor in GSK06 meaning ‘to take umbrage’
For ‘anoint’ the glossary gives *olewy. This word is unattested, being borrowed from Breton.
The attested words are ùntya, anoyntya and ura:
a vgh crist rag y vntye PA 35a
an kigg ew anoyntis SA 60a
worth neb a wra ow vre PC 540.
Olewy is also found in GSK06. I’ve got all the other forms in my SWF dictionary. 
For ‘appear’ the glossary gives omdhisqwedhes.
This is attested once:
ymthysquethas ny vynna the plussyon auelough why RD 1496-97.
A more common way of saying ‘appear’ is dysqwedhes:
ny wruk dev thy'm dysquethas vyth ny'n cresons ef neffre 'God did not appear to me; they will never believe it' OM 1440
e a vednyaz thoranze seer puna Termin reeg an Steare disquethaz Rowe
Elez Neeue a desquethaz ha Joseph a ve hendrez ‘Angels from heaven appeared to Joseph who was asleep’ Rowe.
Tregear uses apperya 14 times and SA has it once. 
Again, omdhisqwedhes must have appeared in one of the beginners’ courses we used to compile the glossary. Since it is attested, it is legitimate to use. I have disqwedhes and apperya in my dictionary glossed ‘appear’;
For ‘article’ the glossary inter alia gives erthygel. This word is unattested being borrowed from Welsh.
The attested word is artickel: dell vgy apperia owrth an artickell ma SA 64.
I will recommend to have this changed. I already list artikel in my dictionary. BTW, in GSK06 you give artykyl and erthygel.
For ‘ascend’the glossary gives yskynna, 'skydnya. This is mistaken. Skydnya means ‘descend’: mehall yskydnyow eall splan hellowgh adam gans cletha dan hay wreage mes a baradice  ‘Michael, descend, bright angel, drive Adam with a sword and his wife out of paradise’ CW 964-66 [spoken by the Father in Heaven]
Yes, I have made this point before in the proofing process. I will restate my effort to get this clarified. <’skydnya> should be listed alongside deskydnya as the SWF/L variant of diyskynna.
The default word for 'ascend' is ascendya:
assendijs then neff inban BM 4052
then neff assendias inweth BM 4084
fatell rug crist assendia thyn neff TH 33a
ew ascendis then nef SA 59
mas Dew ascendias then neff SA 60.
Ascendya was likely not cited because it didn’t occur in any of the wordlists given in the beginners’ courses used to compile the SWF glossary. I do, however, list it in my SWF dictionary. The compilers are aware of the existence of this word in the attested corpus.
For ‘astray’ the glossary gives yn sowdhan which occurs twice in TH but not elsewhere.
Tregear also has the stray x 1, in stray x 2 and war stray x 1, none of which is mentioned in the glossary.
Dhe stray was likely not cited because it didn’t occur in any of the wordlists given in the beginners’ courses used to compile the SWF glossary. I do, however, list all three possibilities of stray with dhe, war and yn in my SWF dictionary.
For ‘attach’ the glossary gives staga. This word is unattested, having been borrowed from Breton.
The attested words are fastya/fasthe and tackya:
yn growys gans kentrow fastis PA 2d
del fastsens en colmennow PA 76b
worth an grovs rag y faste PA 180a
Han grous a ve drehevys ha Ihesus fasteys ynny PA 184a
may fastyo an colm wharre PC 1525
ha'y fastie gans ebyl pren PC 2563
th'aga fastye dyowgel PC 2572
yn pren crous rak y fastie PC 2666
hay yll leff a ve tackis ord en grows PA 179b
En lybell a ve tackis worth en grous PA 189a
ha pen arall o pytet tackis fast PA 223
gans kentrow worth an plynken bethens tackys PC 2517-18
tackeugh e a hugh y ben PC 2793
drou e thy'mmo the tackye a vgh y pen PC 2807-08
rag takkye an fals profus yn pren crous PC 2672-73
fast tackyes gans kentrow hern PC 2938.
The adj. stag ‘fixed, fastened’ appears as stak in BM 1368; Anglo-Cornish has stagged for ‘stuck in the mud’, which means that the root at least is attested and it has been common practice in the Revival to expand the vocabulary by adding derivational suffixes. I believe this word to be legitimate, even if I find fastya, fasthe and tackya preferable to staga. The latter has gained some currency in the Revival owing to the word stagel for ‘e-mail attachment’; 
The glossary has a headword bacqwards. This should be backwards.
Yes, it should.
Under ‘bald’ the glossary gives mol. This is unattested. The attested words are blogh and pylys:
me a pylse the pen blogh BM 3828
a chorll coth te pedn pylles CW 2318.
SWF mool is attested in place names such as Molinnis, surnames such as Moyle, in Anglo-Cornish dialect as mollik, mull, mullog or muller – all having connotations of ‘smooth-topped’; of course blogh and pilys should be part of any comprehensive Cornish dictionary. Mool is legitimate, but I would also like to see the other variants accepted into the Glossary. 
The glossary s.v. ‘bath’ writes kibel f. This word is unattested in the texts, being derived from Cornu-English kibble ‘tub’. The glossary also cites badh which occurs twice in BM.  The glossary does not mention keryn f. which occurs six times in BK as geren. Nor does the glossary mention the abstract troncas which appears as tronkys in BK: ow cul tronkys hedre ve ‘while you are taking a bath’ BK 1086.
Re. badh, I had previously argued in favour of having this changed to bath [bæθ], as I believe the English word would have had a short vowel and a voiceless final consonant at the time it was borrowed. The plural may have had badhys [ˈbæðɪs], a derived verbal noun would also have dh in badhya;  
Kibel is legitimate as it is found in Anglo-Cornish – a good enough source of Cornish words, though I, like you, prefer the words that are actually attested in the Cornish corpus. 
I have nothing against either word, but it must have been kibel that occurred in one of the beginners’ courses from which the vocabulary of the glossary was collected.
The glossary s.v. ‘beforehand’ says it is a preposition and glosses it a-dherag. ‘Beforehand’ is an adverb. The Cornish is dherag dorn:
me a leverys thewgh therag dorne in tyrmyn passys TH 16a
hag eff the cowse in generally thethans y oll therag dorn TH 44a
an re a ve therag dorne in della TH 57a
na ve travith derag dorn SA 61a
the changia pith ny ve derag dorn SA 62
ha changya an pith na go derag dorne SA 62a
or in some contexts, kyns lemmyn:
kyns leman me a's guarnyas PC 757 
pertheugh cof ol an tokyn a leuerys kyns lemyn PC 1082
why an Jeva sufficient declaracion anotha, kyns lymmyn in kythsame godly homyles ma TH 30a
kyns lemyn sure a gowzas ages bos why gucky CW 2422.
I agree; ‘beforehand’ should be derag dorn, dherag dorn, or kyns lemmyn ~ kens lebmyn;  
Under ‘battle’ the glossary gives cas f. only. Batel, batallyow is better attested, the first time in OM: rys yv dy'mmo lafurye the vn vatel yredy OM 2176-77; cas and batel are mentioned together: hag in batal hag in cas BK 1439. The glossary does not mention batel.
‘Battle’ in English is also a verb. This is batalyas in Cornish:
orth escar crist batalyays BM 2474. The glossary does not mention the verb.
Probably because cas occurred in the courses for beginners we used to compile the wordlist for the glossary. In GSK06 you give cas first, before batel; 
In the glossary the word ‘beggar’ is misplaced. There is no headword ‘beg’.
That’s right. There is n head-word ‘beg’. It obviously didn’t occur in the courses for beginners we used to compile the wordlist for the glossary. 
I believe the misplaced word ‘beggar’ has been found in the newer version of the Glossary.
The glossary gives ‘below’ as an adverb. It is also a preposition.
Yes. The gloss ‘below’ (I’m now working from the Cornish-English version of the Glossary) should be added under the head-word yn dann.
The glossary s.v. ‘better’ gives gwella. This is incorrect. Gwella is superlative. The comparative ‘better’ is gwell, e.g. rag my ny vezaf the well ‘for I shall not be better’ BM 109
This appears to have been corrected already as I cannot find the problem in the version I’m working from.
Under ‘booklet’ the glossary gives RMC lyvrik, RLC lyvryn. Lyvrik is unattested having been invented by Nance. Lyvryn appears in Lhuyd’s gerlevran seventeen times. There is no need for the dialectal distinction.
Lyvrik has gained currency in the Revival, which is to be expected as Nance introduced it. The Glossary also gives SWF/L levran. Dialectal distinction is needed as RLC users don’t like the graph <y> and prefer to use the attested <e>. I give SWF/M <lyvryn> and SWF/L <levren> in my SWF dictionary. 
The glossary for ‘Britain’ gives Breten. Breten by itself also means ‘Brittany’; see BM passim. Britain is Breten Veur: 
erbyn Myghtern Bretyn Veor BK 1424 
rag Bretayn Veer the’th arluth mas BK 2124
in Bretayn Ver curunys BK 3136.
            Breten Veur is cited later under Great Britain. Perhaps the glossary should refer the reader to the later entry.
The texts use Breten for ‘Britain’ only, too:
Me yv escop in breten in conteth gelwys kernov (BM 511-512)
may thellen mes an povma arta the breten uskys han falge tevdar avodya (BM 985-7)
Gelwys off epscop kernov in breten heb feladov (BM 2860-1)
ny wela sur in bretyn (BM 4355)
ny veth arel an parna in trogel in breten suyr (BM 4366-7)
del wothen ol in breten (BM 4388)
Assyv helma mur a col in breten sur thynny oll (BM 4467-8)
ny rys thymmo bos amys a dyr Brytyn the vonys tevrant rebo confoundys (BK, in verse 171)
Me ew Lucie an emprror [???] ambes trubyt a pub tyr drys Bryttyn rag ow onor (BK, in verse 232)
an ryboth myghtern Breatayn (BK, in verse 314)
Grug myghtern Bretayn gans ganow efan (BK, in verse 323)
hag in Bretayn bos myghtern (BK, in verse 388)
Me ew myghtern in Bretayn (BK, in verse 411)
The entry in the Glossary is correct. Breten means ‘Britain’ while Breten Veur means ‘Great Britain’ and Bretan Vyhan ~ Breten Vian means ‘Brittany’.
Under ‘build’ the glossary gives drehevel, derevel. The commonest words for ‘to build’ in Cornish are gul and byldya. 
Arluth kepar del vynny an gorhel sur my a’n gura ‘Lord as thou wilt indeed the ark, I shall build it’ OM 965-66
yn enour dev my a vyn yn dre-mme gruthyl temple ‘in God’s honour in this town I shall build a temple’ OM 2283-84
Dauid ny wreth thy'mo chy yn certen bys venary ‘David, you shall not indeed ever build me a house’ OM 2333-34
henna yw pur scorn ha geys ragh y fue kyns y vos gurys dew vgens blythen ha whe ‘that is mere scorn and mockery for it was forty six years before it was built’ PC 349051
Ny dale dieu gwile treven war an treath ‘you should not build houses on the sand’ Jenkins.
To use ‘to make’ for building a house is a common Celtic usage; cf. Irish nuair a rinneadh an teach ‘when the house was built’, lit. ‘when the house was made’.
Cyte a ve settys bo byldys war meneth TH 17a
ha buldyys owgh war an fondacion an abosteleth TH 33
an catholyk egglos, a rug crist y honyn byldya TH 35a
ha war an garrak ma me a vyn byldya ow egglos TH 44a
an egglos a ve buldys warnotha TH 45a
eff a rug buldya y egglos TH 45a
ha war an garrak ma me a vyn buldya ow egglos TH 45a
Ha y ma ow buldya y feith TH 48a
Ew the vos buldys in kepar maner TH 41a
bos sufficient grounde rag pub den da oll the byldya TH 55
praga ew genas she omma buyldya lester mar worthy CW 2296-97.
I note gul chi for ‘build a house’ and will recommend its inclusion in the Glossary. The word drehevel ‘raise, rise, build’ and its parts, however, is well attested and its use in RC is legitimate:
(vbn.) ȝrehevell (PA), drehevell (PA, TH), drehevel (OM, PC, Pr), trehevel (OM, PC, BM, Pr), threheuel (PC, Pr), dreheuel (RD, Pr), terevel (BM), drehevall (TH), derevall (SA, Lh), deraffa (TB), dereval  (JJ, Lh, Pr), derevoll (NB, Lh), dereuall (Lh), dreval (Lh, Pr), derebal (Pr), dhreluel (Pr);
(vb.adj.) drehevys (PA, RD, BM, BK, TH, Pr), dreheuys (RD), dereves (WR), derevalz (JB), dreves (Pr); 
(3sg.pres.-fut.) dreha (OM, PC, Pr), dregha (PC, RD); 
(3sg.impf.) drehevy (PA); (3sg.pret.) drehevys (PA), trehevys (PA, Pr), dreheuys (PC), derauas (TB); 
(3sg.cnd.) dreafse (PC), drehafse (PC), threhafse (PC); 
(3sg.pres.-fut.sbj.) threhavo (RD, Pr), trehava (BM, Pr); 
(2sg.imp.) drefa (BM), drefe (BM); 
(1pl.imp.) drehevyn (OM, Pr); 
(2pl.imp.) dreheueugh (PC), drehefough (PC), dreheveugh (PC);
The glossary under ‘bush’ gives prysken f., prysk coll. This word is unattested. 
This is not entirely true. Pryce cites the plural pryskys (an pryskys serth); it is also attested as Priske and Prisk in place and family names. Its use in RC is therefore legitimate if speakers want to do so. 
The MC words for ‘bush’ are bos and bùsh:
an bos nos dywy a wra saw nyns ugy ov lesky ‘that bush yonder is blazing but it is not burning’ OM 1397-9.
Aspyen orth en buschys BM 1023
In hevelep a flam a dan ow tois mes a busche TH 55
po in bushes ha brakes brase CW 1363
yn cossowe hag in bushes CW 1520
me a vyn mos tha gutha in neb bushe kythew thym greyf CW 1543-44
me a weall un lodn pur vras hans in bushe ow plattya CW 1546-47
prag yth osta in delma yn bushes ow crowetha CW 1606-07.
Bùsh also means ‘crowd’ and the glossary has this, though it spells the word *bosh.
The spelling **bosh has fortunately been changed to bush in updated versions of the Glossary. It should also be glossed ‘bush’ in addition to ‘crowd, mass’; 
Under ‘buzz’, the glossary gives ‘buzz off ‘and glosses it ke war dha gamm! This is incorrect. Ke war dha gamm means ‘steady on, hold on, not so fast’. ‘Buzz off’ is Gwev ow golok:
Desympis gweyf ow golog! BK 570
Desempys gueyf ow golok BK 993
Desempis guef ow golog BK 3183
Thank you. I will recommend this correction. Could <gweyf, gueyf, guef> be interpreted as <go ev> or <gwayt>, maybe?
or one uses the verb voydya ‘leave, depart’:
bo voyd am syght a pur hond ‘or get out of my sight, you utter cur’ BM 2414
rag henna voyde alema ‘so buzz off’ CW 1276.
Under ‘candlestick’ the glossary gives cantolbren and says the plural in RLC is cantolbrednyer. I don’t think so.  Cantolbren is a respelling of cantulbren ‘candelabrum’ in the OCV. The Middle Cornish development is coltrebyn: ny yll kantyll bos annowys ha gorys in dan busshell, mas war coltrebyn bo chandeler TH 17a. Coltrebyn should be used in preference to cantolbren in both MCR and LCR. The plural is *coltrebynnyer, *coltrebydnyer. The glossary’s *cantolbrednyer is without justification.
Good point. I will pass it on. BTW Gendall gives <cantlbrednier>.
carpentor, carpentoryon/carpentors is attested three times in Middle Cornish. Ser prenn is a respelling of Old Cornish sairpren. Carpentor should at least be cited.
It must have been ser prenn ~ ser predn which was cited in the teaching material from which the vocabulary of the Glossary was collected. I agree though that we should find carpenter in a more comprehensive dictionary. Since both expressions are attested in C (tota Cornicitas) it is up to a speaker/writer’s preference which to use.
The glossary gives cador, cadoryow. This word is known only from place-names, where it refers largely to rocks. The ordinary MC word for ‘chair’ was chair:
cheyrys ha formys plente PC 2229
dus oma ese yth cheer BM 3002
then stall po cheare an scribys han phariseis TH 48a
den vith ioynys the chear pedyr TH 49.
The newer updated version of the C-E Glossary has the entries chayr and cador; it will be up to the Cornish speakers to decide which word they prefer. Having said that, cador is so well established as the word for ‘chair’ in RC that because of both its long-term use as well as the prevalent dislike of obvious English loans, I doubt your sound recommendation will be generally followed. I find giving both words to be the best solution for the time being. 
I can’t see why this headword is included (apart from its being in Gerlyver Kres). A chandler is a candle seller, not a merchant.
I can’t tell you why. But I will bring it up and we’ll discuss it.
The glossary gives tolla which means ‘deceive’. Cheating is not the same. The correct word is hyga. 
Ha ro man do higha an lath ‘and give up falsifying the yard’ Gwavas
Yes, though OM 277/8 has: “Eua prag y whruste sy tulle the bryes hep ken”
and OM 293-5: “Rag ty the gola worty ha tolle the bryes len nefre gustyth th'y gorty”
Hyga, BTW, has been included in the Glossary anyway.
There is no attested dual of this word. Dywvogh [diwvogh] is an invention. The plural is known only from boah, bohaw — Cheek, cheeks in the Bodewryd Glossary.
I agree. The dual form is not justified. BTW, Pryce also cites the Bodewyrd Glossary and gives bohow for the plural. Following Nance’s reconstructions, many speakers of RC like using dual form for body parts. Since these are occasionally attested, it cannot be said to be completely unauthentic to use them. 
add gwaya-mir.
hùbadùlya derives from Cornu-Engish. It is not attested in Cornish as such. Isn’t tervans a better word? hag a thros lyes enef a ver drok tervyns ha cas RD 2575-76.
Habadolya is widely used in RLC and is part of the RLC course books used to compile the Glossary. You will also find tervans in the Glossary.
tackya diwleuv should be tackya dewla. *Diwleuv for trad. dywleff is an etymological spelling.
Yes, diwleuv is an etymological spelling, as agreed in the SWF specification. The Glossary also contains diwla ~ dowla. 
*Hin is unattested being borrowed from Breton. I prefer the neologism *aireth, *airedhow. 
It is a matter of discussion and taste whether to use Welsh or Breton loans for gaps in the vocabulary or derived or invented words. Was *ayreth mentioned in Clappya Kernowek? I cannot check right now, I’m in the train without my books…   
As hin is both Breton and Welsh and you give it as hyn in GSK06, it seems to have been accepted into the vocabulary of RC. I see no reason to omit it from the Glossary in preference of SWF ayredh.
*Arvor is unattested, being based on Welsh and Breton. Morrep occurs in place-names. The word attested in the texts is cost:
Pan nowothou, pan guestlow us genowgh why a’n cost west? BK 2222-23
Ke souyth ha north ha gura cry cref in pub cost BK 2350-51.
Pryce has armor and Lhuyd arvorek. I agree that it is doubtful whether these words are originally Cornish. In defence of the Glossary, I make note that they occur in both Nance’s 1938 dictionary as well as in your GSK06, as well as arvoryas, and arvordyr. 
I agree cost should be cited in a more comprehensive dictionary. If it had been used in one of the course books for beginners used to compile the Glossary, it would most certainly have been included.  
add mantel (mantall SA 60 x 2).
Mantel is already part of the Glossary, glossed ‘cloak, mantle’ in the C-E version – I shall endeavour to have ‘coat, overcoat’ added.
The E-C version (July ‘10) has mantel nos ‘dressing gown’, mantel law ‘raincoat’, mantel ‘overcoat, towel’; 
add color, colorys:
fayr an suyt bryte of colour PC 1684
worth agan payntia ny in mes in colors TH 7a
Colorys cler lun a whekter BK 1712-13.
This word was not used in any of the beginners’ course books. They (or at least one of them) contained SWF liw.
Although the glossary has comfortable as a headword it has neither comfort noun nor comfort verb. Confort, comfort is attested 27 times, and confortya 29 times.
Neither confort nor confortya was used in any of the beginners’ course books. The gloss attes under the headword ‘comfortable’ was used in one (or more) of them.
Avowans is unattested. Tregear has confession once. He uses confessia 12 times. BK has confessour ‘confessor’.
Avowans itself may be unattested, but avowa (PC, RD, CW, Pryce (in various forms and spellings)) is not. Avowans is given in GSK06 and probably appears in Clappya Kernowek (can’t check it right now).
The glossary gives fug adj. The word is unattested being borrowed from Welsh and supported by dialect feak. The only attested word for ‘counterfeit’ is contyrfet, i.e. the English word itself:
dre reson y the Justyfia aga honyn dre aga contyrfett benegitter therag an presens an bobill TH 9 
Fug, however, is widely used in RC and thus appears in the beginners’ course material we used to compile the Glossary. You also give fug frequently in GSK06.
The glossary s.v. course (direction) gives hyns, which is unattested in Old, Middle or Late Cornish. It does not, however, give cors, cours which is actually attested:
an guyns thagen corse dufa BM 106
Py du y syngough an cours? BK 1380.
Again, see above. I give kors ~ cors in my dictionary, of course…
The glossary tells us that the word for ‘court’ is lys and for ‘court of law’ is breuslys. Lys is attested in place-names but not in the texts. Breuslys is an invention. The only attested word for ‘court of law’ is cort:
Ma tha vee treall en cort an Vaternes ‘I have a trial in the Queen’s court’ Bilbao MS. The queen is Queen Anne (1702-1714).
The glossary doesn’t mention this word.
Most Revivalists think that the texts are the primary source of Cornish, but many don’t consider them to be our only source. They see personal and place names as valid an attestation as the words found in the texts. Furthermore lys is frequently given in GSK06, and other dictionaries of RC. The word kort ~ cort should definitely be given in a more comprehensive dictionary of Cornish.
The glossary for this word gives pedrevanas (from BM 4218). It does not, however, mention the cramya, cramyas from Genesis 1 by JKeigwin and JBoson.
No, it doesn’t. Kramya ~ cramya doesn’t appear in the beginners’ course material used to compile the Glossary. I have it in my dictionary, though. BTW, J.Boson has <kramia>, and I cannot find Keigwin’s attestation. Pryce has <cramyhas> - is that the one you mean? Was Keigwin cited by Pryce?
The glossary gives gwruthyl and says it is an alternative to gul. 
Yes, and the Glossary is in good company. Nance, George, Gendall and Williams do the same. 
The glossary gives gwrier, creador and furvyer. Gwrier is attested in Middle Cornish. Creador is in OCV. Furvyer is an invention. The word formyer is attested in Middle Cornish. Indeed it occurs at the beginning of OM and in two other texts:
En tas a nef y'm gylwyr formyer pup tra a vyt gvrys OM 1-2
the orth an formyer guella BM 3881
mear worthyans theis ow formyer CW 1414.
The glossary gives one Middle Cornish word, one Old Cornish term and one complete invention. Formyer, which was clearly, a common word for 'creator' it doesn't cite at all.
These were the words used in the vocabularies of the course books from which the Glossary was put together. I, too, prefer formyer to furvyer. I have it in my dictionary. 
The glossary tells us this word is pryv in RMC and prev in RLC. Really?  Preff referring to St Silvester’s dragon is the only form found in Beunans Meriasek. In CW the word is preve, pryf, preaf, and preif. BM is Late Cornish then and CW is Middle Cornish?
The SWF variation set y ~ e (Michael’s bys~bes-words) and the assigned terms RMC ~ RLC are a gross generalisation and not 100% accurate. The general tendency is correct though, we will find more and more e-forms as the development of Cornish progresses, while the older forms usually have y - again a generalisation, but one to make the identification of the forms and preferred usage easier to grasp for the language learner without skills in historical linguistics. Perhaps this should be clarified in the front matter within the statement already found:
“In cases where the SWF allows variant forms with long Y and long E, e.g. dydh ~ dedh or pysk ~ pesk, the latter have been marked as recommended RLC forms. It is recognised, however, that speakers of Tudor Cornish prefer these forms as well, and they are of course free to write them. Much the same applies to variants in EW and OW, e.g. kewsel ~ cows or indeed Kernewek ~ Kernowek, or S and J, e.g. losowen ~ lojowen, as well as other features which are common in RLC but can already be found in Middle Cornish texts. Many of those, even though not restricted to Late Cornish, are not included in the prescribed standards of UC and KK, both of which default to very conservative varieties of the language. The SWF does not imply any such bias.”
I’ll look into it.
The glossary gives arvreusy and crytikya. Both are inventions. The second is based on Nance’s *crytyca, itself based on Lhuyd’s creteco ‘critics’ AB: 224. Why has Nance’s crytyca become a verb in -ya?
I don’t know - possibly a mistake.
The glossary gives molethy, but omits cùssya:
ha paris the cussia ha ty TH 7a
me a yll cussya henna CW 788.
The Glossary doesn’t omit SWF kossya ~ cossya, it merely lists molethi ~ molethy because this word occurred in the course material used to assemble the glossary’s vocabulary. The Glossary is not a comprehensive dictionary. But I agree, cossya ought to be part of one.
The glossary gives nans. This is attested once only in the texts (in the plural):
yn ketella an nanssow wy a bys ragas cuthe PA 170b.
The glossary does not mention tenow, pl. tenwyn: 
drys tnow, drys gun, drys mene’ BK 1161
drys tenuyn ha menythyow BK 2314
a nug thygo drys tenuyn BK 2528.
Nans is the word generally used in RC, much more frequently than tenow. This is why it found its way into the Glossary. It is widely attested in place names.
Decevya, dessevya is attested  9 times. Dyssaytya occurs once in PA
Yes, it does.
The word tolla occurs as a verbal noun over thirty times in various texts such as PA (dolla), OM (as tulle, tolle, dolle, tholle), PC (tolle) BM (tolla), BK (toella, dolla), CW (tulla, dulla, thulla), Lhuyd (dolla, dụlla), W.Rowe (tallah), the verbal adjective is also attested several times in PA, PC, RD, BM, CW, Pryce; other verb parts are attested less frequently. This is an appropriate word to be used in RC, in my opinion.
If ‘deliver’ means ‘free, liberate’ fria should also be included: Ha genz hedna an Vartshants a vî frîez JCH §36.
In an extensive, comprehensive dictionary, certainly, it should be added. I don’t think it is necessary in a Glossary aimed at first year learner of Cornish.
In the vn. a is commoner than e: dybarth x 7, debarth x 2;  dyberth x 2 , deberth x 1. Departya is attested twice (TH and SA).
This may be the noun dibarth (dybarth (1 x OM, 2 x RD, 3 x BM, 1 x Pryce), tebarth (2 x BK);  the verbal noun diberth usually appears with <e> except 3 instances of debarra (J.Boson), the vb.adj. is always with <e> or <y>; <a> occurs in 3sg.pres.-fut. thybarth (2 x PC) and 3sg.pret. debarris, debarras (J.Boson); it is possible that the <a> in J.Boson’s vbn. is by analogy with the pret.; the other possibility is a lowering of <e> to <a> before <r>, which can be observed in a number of instances. 
The entry here is mistaken. Deskydnya is not LC. Skydnya is.
You are correct. This should be changed. Gendall’s dictionary, however, shows both deskidnia and skidnia so **deskydnya was included because of the similarity to its MC equivalent diyskynna. But I definitely agree with you that this mistake should not be perpetuated. I will recommend skydnya only as the L variant.
Why is not dysert mentioned? It occurs in BM 4030, 4138.
I never occurred in the beginner’s course material we used to compile the vocabulary listed in the Glossary.
Surely there are three different forms: dystrewy/dystrowy, dystruya and destria. 
Yes, and we didn’t want to overburden the beginner with all of these. I think the variants SWF/M distrewy and SWF/L distria should be glossed. That is sufficient in a glossary. A comprehensive dictionary should list the others, too, of course.
The glossary gives distruyans. This is an invention. The attested word is dystrùcsyon:
rag agan dry the thestruccion TH 5a
yma destruccion hag anken in aga furthow TH 7a
yma an destruccion ahanowhy ow tos a hanow agys honyn TH 12
thega destruccion aga honyn TH 18
thega destruccion aga honyn TH 18a 
an decay a cherite ew an destruction an bys TH 21
an Destruccion a Jherusalem TH 47a
Ha wosa henna in destruccion TH 49a
distructyon yma ornys CW 2150
han distructyon a vyth bras CW 2162
an distructyon brase han lywe CW 2358
distructyon vythe an parna CW 2506.
Yes, I too would prefer SWF distrukcyon ~ SWF/t distruccyon here. 
Also called tebel el, teball el in PA, BM, TH and BK over 23 times altogether.
Yes, that I correct.
Bos marow is also commonly used for ‘to die’. See my article on the Cornish preterite for examples.
Yes, that is correct, but merwel is attested many times and is sufficient in a glossary such as this. A comprehensive dictionary should include bos marrow, of course. 
dybarow also means ‘different’: yth henwaf bewgh ha tarow oll an chattall debarowe CW 403-04. So does dyvers: palgy ha dyvers clevyon BM 4483.
Yes, it has already been included in an updated version of the Glossary. 
Omgùssulya is an invention. Dadhla is an invention. The attested word for ‘discuss’ is debatya: mara tuen ha debatya BM 3476.
Dadhla is hardly an invention, but a loan from Welsh daddlu. Nance borrowed it and included it in his 1938 dictionary as dathla since which it has been in use in RC. I have nothing against debatya and would be happy to replace dadhla, except that dadhla is in frequent use in RC and debatya hardly is. 
The use of dhadhla in RC is not only justified by its frequency and time of usage in RC, but also because the root is attested in VC datheluur ‘speaker, orator’. Many Cornish words have been coined by deriving them from attested roots. This is only legitimate practice and has been for as long as Cornish has been revived. 
If the root weren’t attested at all, neither in traditional Cornish nor in Anglo-Cornish dialect, I would be inclined to agree with you.
Drog pys is attested occasionally. I can find one example.
The commonest word for ‘displeased’ is dysplêsys:
ha na vewy dysplesys BM 119
ha na vewy dysplesijs BM 322 
genes ythoff dysplesijs BM 400
dysplesijs pur guir genas BM 490
Kynth ogh geneff dysplesijs BM 492
…………. na dysplaysys BK 708.
tyrry blonogath y soveran hay displesya TH 4a
Ny’n dysplaysyth, mars os fuer BK 985. 
I have nothing against displesys, but it didn’t occur in the course material we used to compile the Glossary. It should be in a comprehensive dictionary of Cornish and indeed I include it in mine.
Ranndir is an invention. The word in the texts is cost, côstys:
py tyller yma moyses ha py cost yma trygys PC 1551-52
Jhesus a theth then costes a cesarye philippi TH 43a
Again, I wouldn’t say ‘invention’, but a loan word or lose loan translation borrowed from Welsh rhandir and Breton ranngeriad. I agree cost is preferable, but it probably didn’t occur in the beginners course material we used to compile the Glossary. 
Ancresya is an invention. The attested words are ancombra and annia.
It’s in Nance’s 1952 dictionary. I would prefer ancombra and ania. 
Fycycyen is also well attested:
ov bosy fecycyen connek BM 1421
in bysma rag fecycyen BM 1484
Eff ew an phisicion han metheg TH 11.
Yes it is, but doctour and medhek are the words that occur in the beginner’s course material, so these were the words chosen for the Glossary. 
Add baban BM 3405
It is listed under head word ‘baby’ and specified as ‘baby doll’; 
By far the commonest way of saying ‘down, downwards’ is dhe’n dor (see the examples in Towards Authentic Cornish §19.15 where I cite over 35 examples from PA to Chirgwin:
rag y thry zen dor gans meth PA 136b
Fatla gura ve agaz gorra why en dowr ACB.
I agree. I will recommend its inclusion. 
‘To dwell’ in Cornish is not triga but bos trigys:
yn neff y vonas tregys PA 7b
ha py cost yma trygys OM 1552
thyn ena rag bos trygys OM 1626
gans ihesu a nazare yn certan a fue trygys PC 1279-80
na gans dev ny vyth trygys RD 1110
yma tregys in cambron BM 687
py ma tregys BM 816
omma yth ese tregys BM 1963 
tregys off lemen heb wov berth in castel an dynas BM 2208-09
Tregys vue in lestevdar BM 2284
vgy y vab Jhesus crist inhy tregys TH 11a
kyn fes tregys gans an Jowl! BK 45
Yma tregys in Kembra BK 1292
ena ty a vyth tregys CW 244
En Termen ez passiez thera Trigaz en St. Levan; Dean ha Bennen en Tellar creiez chei an Horr JCH §1.
We must get rid of this UC nonsense of Me a drig ‘I live’. Me a drig means ‘I shall remain’. I live is Yth oma tregys or Yth esof vy tregys. 
I agree that **me a drig for ‘I live’ is unidiomatic but we mustn’t throw the baby out with the bath water. There are several examples in the texts where triga is used as the verbal noun in the sense ‘dwell in, reside in, remain, stay’, or ‘abide’: 
PA (37): ow thermyn a the yn schon genough me nvm byth trege
PA (214): ol y doul ef o tewlys ganso yn nef rag trege
OM 1575-78: an venenes ha’n fleghys vethens yn mes exilyys na theffo onan yn beys the tryge omma neffre  
BM 3182-84: so mot y go ty the drega in tre oma genevy
TH (2): eff a woras mabden the trega in paradise
TH (36a): fatell ve an spurissans promvsiis then appostlys, the drega rag neffra ha bys in gorfen an bys
TH (46a): nena eff a gemeras owne a drega na fella in costna
CW 332-3: yma lower skym[n]ys genaf an Elath sure tha drega
and a few more…
with 1sg.pres.-fut.:
PC 2597-2600 ‘I shall live’: ellas ny won py tyller byth moy py le y trygaf eyghan rag y fynner - mara kyller
BM 946-7 ’if I stay’: marov off in kres an plath na pel mar trege omma
with 3sg.pres.fut.:
PA (212) ‘he shall remain’: hag ef a dryk heb fynweth
OM 1103-04 ‘will stay on’: mar kyf carynnyas certan warnethe y tryg pup preys
OM 556 ‘thou shalt live’: abel ty a dryg nefre
BM 2294 ‘if he dwells’: mar tryg in kernov defry
among more examples. There are also examples of this construction with 3sg.pret. and 3sg.cond.
While it is correct to say that bos trigys is the idiomatic way to express ‘I live, reside’, using finite forms as well as the verbal noun to express ‘dwell, stay, remain’ is also correct. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20110814/6e8d5927/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Spellyans mailing list