eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk
Fri Jul 29 23:52:49 IST 2011
On 2011 Gor 29, at 22:23, nicholas williams wrote:
> I counted the examples electronically. It has been known for some time that gwruthyl was an invention of Nance's. I am astonished that the SWF glossators have not taken this on board.
Let us consider a few citations from the historical corpus, which I found through a quick search of my electronic archives:
> the wruthyl vn pols byhan takclow pryve (PC 92)
> da vye kyns dos sabovt dyswruthyl an fals profes (PC 561)
> Ameys of ow predyry pandra allaf the wruthyl an avel orth y dyrry (OM 193)
If these 3 historical occurrences of 'gwruthyl' are "inventions of Nance's", then the mediæval scribes were uncannily prescient.
Personally, I'm astonished that Nicholas hasn't "taken these on board", since he himself cites them in his article, "The New Testament in KK", published in 2007 in "Form and Content" (pp.116, 161, 176).
> On 2011 Gor 29, at 22:21, A. J. Trim wrote:
>> According to Nicholas, «*Gwruthyl» is unattested.
'Unattested' is a favoured word, but clearly one that's not easy to deploy reliably.
>> However, Nance includes «gwrüthyl» in his 1952 EC dictionary, and in his 1955 CE dictionary. Wella Brown has it in his 1984 grammar. Ken George includes it in his 1993 CE dictionary.
And now we all know where they could have found 'gwruthyl' in the historical corpus.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Spellyans