[Spellyans] the suffix -yeth or -ieth?

Michael Everson everson at evertype.com
Wed May 2 21:18:05 IST 2012

On 2 May 2012, at 20:28, Daniel Prohaska wrote:

> Because the provision Gerlyvryn you let me see has:

Ah. That will have pre-dated the Beybel, where a number of features have been worked out.

> Furthermore, in the foreword to "Alys in Pow an Anethow" I found descajor a galcoryeth.

Yes, but that was the very first publication, preceding formal specifications, and there are certainly some things in that book which will by now be slightly re-spelt. Also there may be UCR spellings in Alys because Nicholas was so used to UCR when he wrote it. It was the Beybel and Enys Tresour where most of the fine points have been worked out. 

> This prompted my checking the sources and spellings in the other dictionaries. Since this appears in a publication, no doubt there are more examples in all the KS publications, I should think this is "official" so that my putting it as "KS appears to have settled with the non-syllabic [jəθ], thus spelling it -yeth" seems accurate.

That would be a hasty judgement on your part, since as you know the orthography has been subject to a period of development. 

> In KS there is only one way of pronouncing ‹calcoryeth›: [kælˈkɔɹjəθ]. If the phonological base, however, should be [kælkəˈri(ː)əθ], then KS would have to spell *calcorieth according to its own rules.

That is correct. In a forthcoming publication we do have both "teknologieth" and "sonieth" for instance. 

> Alys also contains the words tradycyon and satysfacsyon. In tradycyon the -cyon suffix stands for [sjən] or [ʃən].

Yes, it does. 

> Why would one deviate from this in satysfacsyon where elsewhere -syon as in vysyon stands for [zjən] or [ʒən].

"Satysfacsyon" does not imply either [kzjən] or [kʒən] (or [ɡzjən] or [ɡʒən] for that matter), and it could not according to the rules. It could only be [ksjən] or [kʃən]. 

> I should suggest satysfaccyon instead, as -ccion for [ksjən] or [kʃən] is well attested in TH: 
> perfeccion
> the thestruccion
> [...]
> also in 
> condiccion for [sjən] or [ʃən]

Well the last would be condycyon. Yes, you're right, Tregear does use this graph. 

In the Beybel I find that dystrùcsyon occurs (many many many MANY times) and perfecsyon occurs once. The graph <cc> does not occur *at all*. In Enys Tresour <cc> does not occur, and neither does -csyon.  
In two other books not yet published I find dystrùcsyon and projecsyon. 

Since -csyon can only be /ksjən/ I would say that there's no need to add a graph ‹cc› for /ks/ to the system since ‹cs› in this context is unambiguous. Since ‹cs› is already in use in mature KS texts, and since ‹cc› solves no problem, we should stick with ‹cs› in this context. 

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

More information about the Spellyans mailing list