[Spellyans] the suffix -yeth or -ieth?
daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Wed May 2 17:48:42 BST 2012
I have a question pertaining the abstract noun suffix -yeth ~ -ieth, in words such as medhegieth "medicine, remedy" or marhogieth "knighthood, chivalry". The Breton cognates are -iezh and Welsh -ieaeth. Nance wrote this -yeth, but gave it with a diaeresis in his dictionary: -ÿeth, I take it, marking the syllabicity of ‹y› here. This is one of the editorial features which wasn't continued in Nicholas' UCR dictionary, which has -yeth, implied pronunciation [jəθ]. Gendall writes -ieth and gives the non-syllabic pronunciation [jɛθ]. George has -ieth implying syllabicity and the pronunciation [iˑɛθ].
I'm not sure about the Welsh -iaeth, but the Breton -iezh is definitely syllabic and the ‹i› is stressed (at least in the KLT varieties).
KS appears to have settled with the non-syllabic [jəθ], thus spelling it -yeth. I have now looked at the examples of medhegieth in RD mythygyeth and BM methegyeth and it looks to be, going by the metro, that the ‹y› was syllabic. The syllabic pronunciation would appear to serve the usual 7 syllable line in both texts.
RD.1670 mythygyeth a vyth gurys
BM.1487 ny won us methegyeth
I should therefor assume that Nance and George were correct in assuming syllabicity. If this is accepted in KS, as it already has in the SWF, should the KS spelling be emended to -ieth as well?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Spellyans