From craig at agantavas.org Mon Oct 1 12:28:02 2012 From: craig at agantavas.org (Craig Weatherhill) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 12:28:02 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] "Kite" (bird) Message-ID: <1BEFA05A-6621-4D7A-B06C-D559C3AB9063@agantavas.org> The SWF dictionary has . This is wrong. The vowel is , not , the same as and . The only place-name that features it (Treskillard), has: -scul (1327, 1342, 1428); -skul- 1333; -scul (1356); -skeul- (1490); and -stul (for -skul-, 1566). OCV 498 has: scoul. Breton has: skoul. Welsh has: ysgwfl. Craig From j.mills at email.com Mon Oct 1 13:31:22 2012 From: j.mills at email.com (Jon Mills) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:31:22 -0400 Subject: [Spellyans] Ballroom dancing Message-ID: <20121001123122.297290@gmx.com> Thank you to everyone who has made suggestions for "ballroom". I take Michael's point that semantic distinctions are not necessarily made in all languages. And maybe Cornish does not need to distinguish between "ballroom" and "dance hall". However, my inquiry was for a translation of "ballroom dancing". Suppose, for example, one wanted to announce "ballroom dancing classes". This would require a semantic distinction to convey the particular genre of dance (i.e. "ballroom dancing" not "morris-dancing", etc.). I suppose one could borrow the English word to create "dauns-ballroom". But I suspect such a borrowing would not be popular. Any further suggestions? Ol an gwella, Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: njawilliams Sent: 09/28/12 06:04 PM To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] Ballroom dancing Stevel isn't attested outside one occurrence in OCV. It means dining room. Nicholas Sent from my iPhone On 2012 Gwn 28, at 13:16, Michael Everson wrote: > On 28 Sep 2012, at 11:40, Jon Mills wrote: > >> I agree 'that stevel' may not be the best choice. However there is a semantic distinction between a 'dance' and a 'ball'. A 'ball' is a type of dance event. > > They may not be distinct in every language. > >> There is also a distinction between 'ballroom' and 'dance hall'. 'Ballroom dancing' entails dances such as the waltz, the foxtrot, the tango and precludes hornpipes, reels, and breakdancing. More suggestions, please. > > Daunsva. (< W.) > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _______________________________________________ Spellyans mailing list Spellyans at kernowek.net http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net _____________________________________ Dr. Jon Mills, University of Kent http://kent.academia.edu/JonMills -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 1 13:50:48 2012 From: eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk (Hedley Climo) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 13:50:48 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] "Kite" (bird) In-Reply-To: <1BEFA05A-6621-4D7A-B06C-D559C3AB9063@agantavas.org> References: <1BEFA05A-6621-4D7A-B06C-D559C3AB9063@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <25FEF8FE-A6B1-42F4-928F-B1DA03709640@yahoo.co.uk> Nance 1938 gives UC scowl, and Williams 2006 has the same for UCR. By contract, Gendall 2008 and Kennedy each have RLC scoul (which is also cited by Nance from the OCV). Looks like opinions are divided, old pard, between MC and RLC. Eddie Climo On 2012 Hed 1, at 12:28, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > The SWF dictionary has . This is wrong. The vowel is , not , the same as and . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 1 14:28:15 2012 From: eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk (Hedley Climo) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 14:28:15 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] Ballroom dancing In-Reply-To: <20121001123122.297290@gmx.com> References: <20121001123122.297290@gmx.com> Message-ID: <02B6B149-079A-43CE-BD43-813E7B5C174F@yahoo.co.uk> The American OED has the definition > ballroom dancing. formal social dancing in couples? That suggests something like 'donsya furfvus/furvek'. Alternatively, UCR has 'hel donsya' for a ballroom; simply inverting it to 'donsya hel' might do the trick, or following some of the models below, we might have 'donsya salon' (UCR does offer this latter word) Using Wikipedia's entries on the subject, we find that other languages include the following terms: Standardt?nze (German), Danse de salon (French), Baile de sal?n (Galician, Spanish), Stijldans (Dutch), Dansuri de societate (Romanian). Eddie Climo On 2012 Hed 1, at 13:31, Jon Mills wrote: > > Thank you to everyone who has made suggestions for "ballroom". I take Michael's point that semantic distinctions are not necessarily made in all languages. And maybe Cornish does not need to distinguish between "ballroom" and "dance hall". However, my inquiry was for a translation of "ballroom dancing". Suppose, for example, one wanted to announce "ballroom dancing classes". This would require a semantic distinction to convey the particular genre of dance (i.e. "ballroom dancing" not "morris-dancing", etc.). I suppose one could borrow the English word to create "dauns-ballroom". But I suspect such a borrowing would not be popular. Any further suggestions? > Ol an gwella, > Jon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Mon Oct 1 14:28:55 2012 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 14:28:55 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] "Kite" (bird) In-Reply-To: <25FEF8FE-A6B1-42F4-928F-B1DA03709640@yahoo.co.uk> References: <1BEFA05A-6621-4D7A-B06C-D559C3AB9063@agantavas.org> <25FEF8FE-A6B1-42F4-928F-B1DA03709640@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: On 1 Oct 2012, at 13:50, Hedley Climo wrote: > Nance 1938 gives UC scowl, and Williams 2006 has the same for UCR. > > By contract, Gendall 2008 and Kennedy each have RLC scoul (which is also cited by Nance from the OCV). > > Looks like opinions are divided, old pard, between MC and RLC. The question is not perhaps so much the spelling, but the pronunciation. If it rhymes with "school" then ?scoul? or ?sc?l? would represent that pronunciation. If it rhimes with "sk?l" (the Danish 'cheers') then ?scowl? would do. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Mon Oct 1 15:23:45 2012 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 16:23:45 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] "Kite" (bird) In-Reply-To: <1BEFA05A-6621-4D7A-B06C-D559C3AB9063@agantavas.org> References: <1BEFA05A-6621-4D7A-B06C-D559C3AB9063@agantavas.org> Message-ID: <5311B0C9-D450-4FE7-8BB1-D3AA4FB396FE@ryan-prohaska.com> Craig, I would surmise that ?scowl? /sk??l/ is correct. There is also an Old Breton attestation ?scubl? which shows a consonant before the /l/ similar to the Welsh ?f?, probably /v/. The Cornish /o/ rather than /u/ as in Breton and Welsh would be a regular development as well as the vocalisation of /v/ to /w/. Compare the word ?dowr?? Dan On Oct 1, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Craig Weatherhill wrote: > The SWF dictionary has . This is wrong. The vowel is , not , the same as and . > > The only place-name that features it (Treskillard), has: -scul (1327, 1342, 1428); -skul- 1333; -scul (1356); -skeul- (1490); and -stul (for -skul-, 1566). > OCV 498 has: scoul. > Breton has: skoul. > Welsh has: ysgwfl. > > Craig -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.mills at email.com Thu Oct 4 09:08:13 2012 From: j.mills at email.com (Jon Mills) Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 04:08:13 -0400 Subject: [Spellyans] amphibious Message-ID: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> Can anyone suggest the best way to translate the word "amphibious" Ol an gwella, Jon _____________________________________ Dr. Jon Mills, University of Kent http://kent.academia.edu/JonMills -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevin.blackburn1 at ntlworld.com Thu Oct 4 09:39:05 2012 From: kevin.blackburn1 at ntlworld.com (Herbie Blackburn) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 09:39:05 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] amphibious In-Reply-To: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> References: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> Message-ID: <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> I have a note suggesting 'dewelvennek / dewelvennow' - not sure where from - Nicholas Williams has 'dewelvennek' for Amphibian too. Regards Herbie Jon wrote: > Can anyone suggest the best way to translate the word "amphibious" > Ol an gwella, > Jon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 10:09:43 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (njawilliams) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 10:09:43 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] amphibious In-Reply-To: <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> References: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> Message-ID: <56A32F3E-BA1B-4B08-8BD4-BF8132294034@gmail.com> Dewelvennek means 'of two elements' i.e. air and water, so amphibious. Elven is attested in C. dialect meaning 'porphyritic rock'. The word is ultimately from Latin elementum. I used it in its original sense. Sent from my iPhone On 2012 Hed 4, at 09:39, "Herbie Blackburn" wrote: > I have a note suggesting ?dewelvennek / dewelvennow? ? not sure where from ? Nicholas Williams has ?dewelvennek? for Amphibian too. > > Regards > > Herbie > > Jon wrote: > > > Can anyone suggest the best way to translate the word "amphibious" > > Ol an gwella, > > Jon > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 10:18:09 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 10:18:09 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] amphibious In-Reply-To: <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> References: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> Message-ID: <21038AFF-DA3E-49A1-AB87-CEE13E126ED5@gmail.com> The Cornish dialect word is elvan 'porphyritic rock', but Nance gives men elven for that and suggests that elven itself means 'spark, atom, element'. I did not really invent dewelvennek (KS dywelvednek) because the Breton for 'amphibian' (substantive) is divelvennat. This is similar to the Irish term d?bheathach 'creature of two lives > amphibian'. Nicholas On 4 Oct 2012, at 09:39, Herbie Blackburn wrote: > ?dewelvennek? for Amphibian too. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 10:25:22 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 10:25:22 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their Message-ID: We all learnt from Nance that 'in our, in your, in their' in Cornish are y'gan y'gas y'ga. The curious thing is this. Y'gan, i'gan does not seem to be attested. In agan on the other hand is attested 30 times. And yn agan occurs twice. I am unable to find any example at all of y'gas, i'gas but yn agas x 5, in agys x 5, yn ages x 2. Y'ga is found once as yge at RD 886. Yn aga, in aga on the other hand occur x 24. I think the handbooks ought to be revised. Nicholas From ray at spyrys.org Thu Oct 4 11:30:27 2012 From: ray at spyrys.org (Ray Chubb) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 11:30:27 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> Would speakers really take the trouble to use these extended forms in rapid speech? On 4 Hed 2012, at 10:25, Nicholas Williams wrote: > We all learnt from Nance that 'in our, in your, in their' in > Cornish are > > y'gan > y'gas > y'ga. > > The curious thing is this. Y'gan, i'gan does not seem to be > attested. In agan on the other hand is attested 30 times. And yn > agan occurs twice. > I am unable to find any example at all of y'gas, i'gas but yn agas x > 5, in agys x 5, yn ages x 2. > Y'ga is found once as yge at RD 886. Yn aga, in aga on the other > hand occur x 24. > > I think the handbooks ought to be revised. > > Nicholas > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net Ray Chubb Portreth Kernow Agan Tavas web site: www.agantavas.com From everson at evertype.com Thu Oct 4 11:40:28 2012 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 11:40:28 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> References: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> Message-ID: <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> On 4 Oct 2012, at 11:30, Ray Chubb wrote: > Would speakers really take the trouble to use these extended forms in rapid speech? If they are well-attested in the corpus one may assume that speakers of Cornish used them. The question is, is there warrant for the abbreviated forms? On 4 Hed 2012, at 10:25, Nicholas Williams wrote: > We all learnt from Nance that 'in our, in your, in their' in Cornish are > > y'gan > y'gas > y'ga. > > The curious thing is this. Y'gan, i'gan does not seem to be attested. In agan on the other hand is attested 30 times. And yn agan occurs twice. > I am unable to find any example at all of y'gas, i'gas but yn agas x 5, in agys x 5, yn ages x 2. > Y'ga is found once as yge at RD 886. Yn aga, in aga on the other hand occur x 24. Is the RD form short for the purposes of metre? Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Thu Oct 4 12:31:50 2012 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 13:31:50 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> References: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> Message-ID: Th ero ve ow leverel ?et aga?? Dan On Oct 4, 2012, at 12:40 PM, Michael Everson wrote: > > On 4 Oct 2012, at 11:30, Ray Chubb wrote: > >> Would speakers really take the trouble to use these extended forms in rapid speech? > > If they are well-attested in the corpus one may assume that speakers of Cornish used them. The question is, is there warrant for the abbreviated forms? > > On 4 Hed 2012, at 10:25, Nicholas Williams wrote: > >> We all learnt from Nance that 'in our, in your, in their' in Cornish are >> >> y'gan >> y'gas >> y'ga. >> >> The curious thing is this. Y'gan, i'gan does not seem to be attested. In agan on the other hand is attested 30 times. And yn agan occurs twice. >> I am unable to find any example at all of y'gas, i'gas but yn agas x 5, in agys x 5, yn ages x 2. >> Y'ga is found once as yge at RD 886. Yn aga, in aga on the other hand occur x 24. > > Is the RD form short for the purposes of metre? > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net From njawilliams at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 13:34:05 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 13:34:05 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: References: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> Message-ID: <37C24422-DCFC-4E1B-9A02-95DD5F81D62A@gmail.com> Which is based on Rowe: Ha Jesus geth oll a dr? der Alale, deske et ago Eglezow Nicholas On 4 Oct 2012, at 12:31, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > Th ero ve ow leverel ?et aga?? From j.mills at email.com Thu Oct 4 16:35:12 2012 From: j.mills at email.com (Jon Mills) Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 11:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Spellyans] amphibious Message-ID: <20121004153513.28570@gmx.com> Thank you, Nicholas and Herbie. Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: Nicholas Williams Sent: 10/04/12 10:18 AM To: Standard Cornish discussion list Subject: Re: [Spellyans] amphibious The Cornish dialect word is elvan 'porphyritic rock', but Nance gives men elven for that and suggests that elven itself means 'spark, atom, element'. I did not really invent dewelvennek (KS dywelvednek) because the Breton for 'amphibian' (substantive) is divelvennat. This is similar to the Irish term d?bheathach 'creature of two lives > amphibian'. Nicholas On 4 Oct 2012, at 09:39, Herbie Blackburn wrote: ?dewelvennek? for Amphibian too. _____________________________________ Dr. Jon Mills, University of Kent http://kent.academia.edu/JonMills -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nickyrowe at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 16:50:04 2012 From: nickyrowe at gmail.com (Nicky Rowe) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 16:50:04 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: <37C24422-DCFC-4E1B-9A02-95DD5F81D62A@gmail.com> References: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> <37C24422-DCFC-4E1B-9A02-95DD5F81D62A@gmail.com> Message-ID: Goes together with dhe'gan, ha'gan, etc. Ideally rules are consistent across the board. Having a rule that says 'gan can be used with dhe and ha, but not yn, but 'ga can be used with yn, may be following the texts if proved to be the case but it doesn't make sense from a modern learner perspective. In this case I would opt for regularisation. Nicky On 4 October 2012 13:34, Nicholas Williams wrote: > Which is based on Rowe: Ha Jesus geth oll a dr? der Alale, deske et ago > Eglezow > > Nicholas > > On 4 Oct 2012, at 12:31, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > > > Th ero ve ow leverel ?et aga?? > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From janicelobb at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 23:27:13 2012 From: janicelobb at gmail.com (Janice Lobb) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 23:27:13 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: <37C24422-DCFC-4E1B-9A02-95DD5F81D62A@gmail.com> References: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> <37C24422-DCFC-4E1B-9A02-95DD5F81D62A@gmail.com> Message-ID: Don't we have "et a fockat" in JCH? Jan On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Nicholas Williams wrote: > Which is based on Rowe: Ha Jesus geth oll a dr? der Alale, deske et ago > Eglezow > > Nicholas > > On 4 Oct 2012, at 12:31, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > > > Th ero ve ow leverel ?et aga?? > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Fri Oct 5 08:18:24 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (njawilliams) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 08:18:24 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: References: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> <37C24422-DCFC-4E1B-9A02-95DD5F81D62A@gmail.com> Message-ID: But that is 'in my pocket'. The point under discussion is the plural possessive adjectives after in. Sent from my iPhone On 2012 Hed 4, at 23:27, Janice Lobb wrote: > Don't we have "et a fockat" in JCH? > Jan > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Nicholas Williams wrote: >> Which is based on Rowe: Ha Jesus geth oll a dr? der Alale, deske et ago Eglezow >> >> Nicholas >> >> On 4 Oct 2012, at 12:31, Daniel Prohaska wrote: >> >> > Th ero ve ow leverel ?et aga?? >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Spellyans mailing list >> Spellyans at kernowek.net >> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From janicelobb at gmail.com Fri Oct 5 09:29:16 2012 From: janicelobb at gmail.com (Janice Lobb) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 09:29:16 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: References: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> <37C24422-DCFC-4E1B-9A02-95DD5F81D62A@gmail.com> Message-ID: So, by extrapolation, can we use "et agon", etc? On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 8:18 AM, njawilliams wrote: > But that is 'in my pocket'. The point under discussion is the plural > possessive adjectives after in. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2012 Hed 4, at 23:27, Janice Lobb wrote: > > Don't we have "et a fockat" in JCH? > Jan > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Nicholas Williams wrote: > >> Which is based on Rowe: Ha Jesus geth oll a dr? der Alale, deske et ago >> Eglezow >> >> Nicholas >> >> On 4 Oct 2012, at 12:31, Daniel Prohaska wrote: >> >> > Th ero ve ow leverel ?et aga?? >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Spellyans mailing list >> Spellyans at kernowek.net >> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >> > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Fri Oct 5 10:26:49 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 10:26:49 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: References: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> <37C24422-DCFC-4E1B-9A02-95DD5F81D62A@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53E9A563-7F87-4D73-9CF8-49FDB9A237F3@gmail.com> et agon is already attested in Keigwin's Genesis 1: Ha Deew lauarhaz Gezzo ni Geele deene at agon Emadye. Nicholas On 5 Oct 2012, at 09:29, Janice Lobb wrote: > So, by extrapolation, can we use "et agon", etc? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Fri Oct 5 10:43:46 2012 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 10:43:46 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: References: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> <37C24422-DCFC-4E1B-9A02-95DD5F81D62A@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5C68D8B1-A4FE-4AD7-B1BF-32B9314BF1BB@evertype.com> On 5 Oct 2012, at 09:29, Janice Lobb wrote: > So, by extrapolation, can we use "et agon", etc? In KS the spelling would be "et agan". Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 5 08:35:07 2012 From: eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk (Hedley Climo) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 08:35:07 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] amphibious In-Reply-To: <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> References: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> Message-ID: NJAW 2006's full entry reads: > amphibian. a. dewelvennek; dor ha mor In addition, some of the adjacent entries admit into UCR the Greek prefixes amfi-, amfo-. We might also note that both German and French have borrowed from Greek the adj. amphibie. By contrast, Welsh (in GPC, Geiriadur Prifysgol Cymru) offers us dauelfennog, dywelfennol, and tirddyfrol (< tyr + dyfr + -ol, 'land-water-ous'). All this suggests: ?NJAW's dewelvennek is fine; ?while his dor ha mor has the virtue of rhyming, it is biologically too restrictive: there are freshwater amphibians to consider, after all, for whom we might use *dor ha dowr > best *dor-ha-dowr ?taking the UCR entries "aquatic. dowrek", and "marine. morek", and using them to calque the final entry in GPC, might give us *dordhowrek for amphibians in general, and *dorvorek for marine ones. ?alternatively, we might wish to use Nance's offerings ?dever, devrak (the latter also being in UCR) for an older feel > *dor ha dever, *dordhevrak ?we might also consider *amfibew(ek) as general terms for scientific use, as they are closer to international scientific terminology. Any thoughts? Eddie Climo On 2012 Hed 4, at 09:39, Herbie Blackburn wrote: > ?Nicholas Williams has ?dewelvennek? for Amphibian? > > Jon wrote: > > > Can anyonesuggest the best way to translate the word "amphibious" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From janicelobb at gmail.com Sat Oct 6 00:34:44 2012 From: janicelobb at gmail.com (Janice Lobb) Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 00:34:44 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] in our, in your, in their In-Reply-To: <5C68D8B1-A4FE-4AD7-B1BF-32B9314BF1BB@evertype.com> References: <9D302878-06A6-421E-AC2F-E5B8CA0642DD@spyrys.org> <98CC744A-163F-4938-8325-A4B270814964@evertype.com> <37C24422-DCFC-4E1B-9A02-95DD5F81D62A@gmail.com> <5C68D8B1-A4FE-4AD7-B1BF-32B9314BF1BB@evertype.com> Message-ID: my mistake Jan On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Michael Everson wrote: > On 5 Oct 2012, at 09:29, Janice Lobb wrote: > > > So, by extrapolation, can we use "et agon", etc? > > In KS the spelling would be "et agan". > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Sat Oct 6 19:00:27 2012 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 20:00:27 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] enuedzhek In-Reply-To: References: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> Message-ID: Dhew'whei lowena! I've been wondering about the word ?enuedzhek? which is found in Pryce's Archaeologia Cornu-Britannica. RLC dictionaries list is variously as ?enwedgak?, ?enwejak? and ?enwedzhek?. Gendall glosses it as 'particular, distinct, individual', and gives a Lhuydian attestation ?enu?edzhek? which I am unable to find. Ken George emends it to ?ynwedhek? meaning 'additional'. I would very much appreciate opinions from whoever feels he or she can comment on this word. Gromercy dhewgh, Dan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Sat Oct 6 21:16:14 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 21:16:14 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] enuedzhek In-Reply-To: References: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> Message-ID: The word enuedzhek occurs once only as far as I can see. It is found in Lhuyd's preface to his Cornish grammar AB: 222 where he says: dhort genauo an b?bl en Gorleuen Kernou en enuedzhek en pleu Yst 'from the mouths of the people in the West of Cornwall, especially in the parish of St Just' A variant form anuezek occurs a little later on the same page where Lhuyd writes: en anuezek Mr. John Keyguyn a?n Tshei izala en Por Enez 'especially Mr John Keigwin of the Lower House in Mousehole' enuedzhek, anuezek are Lhuyd's Cornicisations of Welsh enwedig 'special, particular'. The word has nothing to do with inwedh 'also'. Nicholas On 6 Oct 2012, at 19:00, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > I've been wondering about the word ?enuedzhek? which is found in Pryce's Archaeologia Cornu-Britannica. RLC dictionaries list is variously as ?enwedgak?, ?enwejak? and ?enwedzhek?. Gendall glosses it as 'particular, distinct, individual', and gives a Lhuydian attestation ?enu?edzhek? which I am unable to find. Ken George emends it to ?ynwedhek? meaning 'additional'. I would very much appreciate opinions from whoever feels he or she can comment on this word. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Sat Oct 6 21:20:28 2012 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 22:20:28 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] enuedzhek In-Reply-To: References: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> Message-ID: <44EE7910-EA44-459A-9AEE-0D9A1480344B@ryan-prohaska.com> Gromercy dhis Nicholas!!!! Sent from my iPhone On 06.10.2012, at 22:16, Nicholas Williams wrote: > The word enuedzhek occurs once only as far as I can see. It is found in Lhuyd's preface to his Cornish grammar AB: 222 > where he says: > > dhort genauo an b?bl en Gorleuen Kernou en enuedzhek en pleu Yst 'from the mouths of the people in the West of Cornwall, especially in the parish of St Just' > > A variant form anuezek occurs a little later on the same page where Lhuyd writes: > > en anuezek Mr. John Keyguyn a?n Tshei izala en Por Enez 'especially Mr John Keigwin of the Lower House in Mousehole' > > enuedzhek, anuezek are Lhuyd's Cornicisations of Welsh enwedig 'special, particular'. > The word has nothing to do with inwedh 'also'. > > Nicholas > > On 6 Oct 2012, at 19:00, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > >> I've been wondering about the word ?enuedzhek? which is found in Pryce's Archaeologia Cornu-Britannica. RLC dictionaries list is variously as ?enwedgak?, ?enwejak? and ?enwedzhek?. Gendall glosses it as 'particular, distinct, individual', and gives a Lhuydian attestation ?enu?edzhek? which I am unable to find. Ken George emends it to ?ynwedhek? meaning 'additional'. I would very much appreciate opinions from whoever feels he or she can comment on this word. > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Sun Oct 7 00:07:32 2012 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2012 01:07:32 +0200 Subject: [Spellyans] enuedzhek In-Reply-To: <44EE7910-EA44-459A-9AEE-0D9A1480344B@ryan-prohaska.com> References: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> <44EE7910-EA44-459A-9AEE-0D9A1480344B@ryan-prohaska.com> Message-ID: Nicholas, I've just seen that in Your UCR dictionary you give ?henwesek? for 'nominative' (both adj. & n.), is this also inspired by ?(h)enwedig?; then there's Nance's ?henwesyk? 'nominated' and ?henwesygeth? 'nomination' (cf. W ?(h)enwedigaeth? 'appellation' and B ?anwidigezh? 'nomination'). What do you think, should I list ?enwedzhek, anuezek? as attestations of ?henwesek/henwejek? with a note saying they are based on Lhuyd's Cornicisation of W ?enwedig? (+ derivations)? Muer ras dhis, Dan On Oct 6, 2012, at 10:20 PM, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > Gromercy dhis Nicholas!!!! > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 06.10.2012, at 22:16, Nicholas Williams wrote: > >> The word enuedzhek occurs once only as far as I can see. It is found in Lhuyd's preface to his Cornish grammar AB: 222 >> where he says: >> >> dhort genauo an b?bl en Gorleuen Kernou en enuedzhek en pleu Yst 'from the mouths of the people in the West of Cornwall, especially in the parish of St Just' >> >> A variant form anuezek occurs a little later on the same page where Lhuyd writes: >> >> en anuezek Mr. John Keyguyn a?n Tshei izala en Por Enez 'especially Mr John Keigwin of the Lower House in Mousehole' >> >> enuedzhek, anuezek are Lhuyd's Cornicisations of Welsh enwedig 'special, particular'. >> The word has nothing to do with inwedh 'also'. >> >> Nicholas >> >> On 6 Oct 2012, at 19:00, Daniel Prohaska wrote: >> >>> I've been wondering about the word ?enuedzhek? which is found in Pryce's Archaeologia Cornu-Britannica. RLC dictionaries list is variously as ?enwedgak?, ?enwejak? and ?enwedzhek?. Gendall glosses it as 'particular, distinct, individual', and gives a Lhuydian attestation ?enu?edzhek? which I am unable to find. Ken George emends it to ?ynwedhek? meaning 'additional'. I would very much appreciate opinions from whoever feels he or she can comment on this word. >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Spellyans mailing list >> Spellyans at kernowek.net >> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Sun Oct 7 07:42:31 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (njawilliams) Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2012 07:42:31 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] enuedzhek In-Reply-To: References: <20121004080813.28570@gmx.com> <32318FDFF2AC4AFFB5C3156B6625419B@HomePC> <44EE7910-EA44-459A-9AEE-0D9A1480344B@ryan-prohaska.com> Message-ID: <4A192142-6570-4799-9156-700735707158@gmail.com> Enwesek/enwejek and henwesek are different items synchronically and should be listed separately. Nicholas Sent from my iPhone On 2012 Hed 7, at 00:07, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > Nicholas, > > I've just seen that in Your UCR dictionary you give ?henwesek? for 'nominative' (both adj. & n.), is this also inspired by ?(h)enwedig?; then there's Nance's ?henwesyk? 'nominated' and ?henwesygeth? 'nomination' (cf. W ?(h)enwedigaeth? 'appellation' and B ?anwidigezh? 'nomination'). What do you think, should I list ?enwedzhek, anuezek? as attestations of ?henwesek/henwejek? with a note saying they are based on Lhuyd's Cornicisation of W ?enwedig? (+ derivations)? > > Muer ras dhis, > Dan > > > > On Oct 6, 2012, at 10:20 PM, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > >> Gromercy dhis Nicholas!!!! >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 06.10.2012, at 22:16, Nicholas Williams wrote: >> >>> The word enuedzhek occurs once only as far as I can see. It is found in Lhuyd's preface to his Cornish grammar AB: 222 >>> where he says: >>> >>> dhort genauo an b?bl en Gorleuen Kernou en enuedzhek en pleu Yst 'from the mouths of the people in the West of Cornwall, especially in the parish of St Just' >>> >>> A variant form anuezek occurs a little later on the same page where Lhuyd writes: >>> >>> en anuezek Mr. John Keyguyn a?n Tshei izala en Por Enez 'especially Mr John Keigwin of the Lower House in Mousehole' >>> >>> enuedzhek, anuezek are Lhuyd's Cornicisations of Welsh enwedig 'special, particular'. >>> The word has nothing to do with inwedh 'also'. >>> >>> Nicholas >>> >>> On 6 Oct 2012, at 19:00, Daniel Prohaska wrote: >>> >>>> I've been wondering about the word ?enuedzhek? which is found in Pryce's Archaeologia Cornu-Britannica. RLC dictionaries list is variously as ?enwedgak?, ?enwejak? and ?enwedzhek?. Gendall glosses it as 'particular, distinct, individual', and gives a Lhuydian attestation ?enu?edzhek? which I am unable to find. Ken George emends it to ?ynwedhek? meaning 'additional'. I would very much appreciate opinions from whoever feels he or she can comment on this word. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Spellyans mailing list >>> Spellyans at kernowek.net >>> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net >> _______________________________________________ >> Spellyans mailing list >> Spellyans at kernowek.net >> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Wed Oct 31 15:33:16 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 15:33:16 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] horseman Message-ID: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> In Cornish the word for 'horseman' ends either in -ek or -ak: marrak PA 246, BK 1514, 1632, 1648, marrack NBoson marrek PA 241d, 242a, 244a, 245a, OM 2004, 2139, 2150, 2204, 2226, 2338, BM 350, 2444. marreg PA 190b, 190c, 217a, 218b. The voicing of the final stop in marreg is probably to be explained by dissimilation. The reduction of the medial -rx- to -rh- (and thus a devoiced r) probably led to the voicing of the final segment by dissimilation of the sequence voiceless + voiceless > voiceless + voiced. The original shape of the word was probably *marhek < *marx?ko- cf. Welsh marchog < earlier marchawc. The expected plural with o (cf. bohosek, but bohosogyon) is seen in marrogyon BM 221, BK 1946, 2381, marrogyan BK 2252 marogyan OM 1876, marogyen BM 1742, marogyon BM 294, 815, 4359, BK 3286. There is, however, an analogical plural in -egyon: marregyon PC 1613, 2347, RD 657, marregion RD 607. I think the revived language should allow both, and spell them marhogyon, marhegyon. Nicholas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Wed Oct 31 16:26:38 2012 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:26:38 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] horseman In-Reply-To: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> References: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 31 Oct 2012, at 15:33, Nicholas Williams wrote: > I think the revived language should allow both, and spell them marhogyon, marhegyon. Since we have a rule regarding the spelling of the final syllable of the singular with plurals like this, the permitted spellings would be marhek, marhegyon; marhak, marhogyon. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From njawilliams at gmail.com Wed Oct 31 16:27:42 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:27:42 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] horseman In-Reply-To: References: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> Message-ID: <550F5B96-BD0F-4B0E-80A9-F35E9520335E@gmail.com> Agreed. On 31 Oct 2012, at 16:26, Michael Everson wrote: > Since we have a rule regarding the spelling of the final syllable of the singular with plurals like this, the permitted spellings would be marhek, marhegyon; marhak, marhogyon. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Wed Oct 31 17:59:10 2012 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:59:10 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] horseman In-Reply-To: References: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> Message-ID: I don't think it's ideal to have two spelling of what is essentially the same ending, pronounced the same. There's a wide consensus to spell this <-ek>, I think that's what we ought to do. Dan Sent from my iPhone On 31.10.2012, at 17:26, Michael Everson wrote: > On 31 Oct 2012, at 15:33, Nicholas Williams wrote: > >> I think the revived language should allow both, and spell them marhogyon, marhegyon. > > Since we have a rule regarding the spelling of the final syllable of the singular with plurals like this, the permitted spellings would be marhek, marhegyon; marhak, marhogyon. > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Wed Oct 31 18:01:08 2012 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 19:01:08 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] horseman In-Reply-To: <550F5B96-BD0F-4B0E-80A9-F35E9520335E@gmail.com> References: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> <550F5B96-BD0F-4B0E-80A9-F35E9520335E@gmail.com> Message-ID: I'm all for allowing the two plurals according to personal preference, . I would spell the singular only. Sent from my iPhone On 31.10.2012, at 17:27, Nicholas Williams wrote: > Agreed. > > > On 31 Oct 2012, at 16:26, Michael Everson wrote: > >> Since we have a rule regarding the spelling of the final syllable of the singular with plurals like this, the permitted spellings would be marhek, marhegyon; marhak, marhogyon. > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njawilliams at gmail.com Wed Oct 31 18:09:11 2012 From: njawilliams at gmail.com (Nicholas Williams) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:09:11 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] horseman In-Reply-To: References: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> <550F5B96-BD0F-4B0E-80A9-F35E9520335E@gmail.com> Message-ID: In the SWF, which we don't use. On 31 Oct 2012, at 18:01, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > I would spell the singular only. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From everson at evertype.com Wed Oct 31 18:22:44 2012 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:22:44 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] horseman In-Reply-To: References: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 31 Oct 2012, at 17:59, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > I don't think it's ideal to have two spelling of what is essentially the same ending, pronounced the same. There's a wide consensus to spell this <-ek>, I think that's what we ought to do. We have a rule about plural formation and the singular. If the plural is in -egyon, the singular ends in -ek. If the plural ends in -ogyon, the singular ends in -ak. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Wed Oct 31 19:35:48 2012 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:35:48 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] horseman In-Reply-To: References: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> <550F5B96-BD0F-4B0E-80A9-F35E9520335E@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7B7B367D-2DBD-4E94-9235-857CC9984382@ryan-prohaska.com> Yes. Sent from my iPhone On 31.10.2012, at 19:09, Nicholas Williams wrote: > In the SWF, which we don't use. > > On 31 Oct 2012, at 18:01, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > >> I would spell the singular only. > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From daniel at ryan-prohaska.com Wed Oct 31 19:37:53 2012 From: daniel at ryan-prohaska.com (Daniel Prohaska) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:37:53 +0100 Subject: [Spellyans] horseman In-Reply-To: References: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0BE171B4-5F2A-442E-9E06-D7F338C71E87@ryan-prohaska.com> I know. I just don't think it justfies spelling the same suffix two diffrent ways, which leaves you with two variants of the same word in the singular meaning zhe same thing with an identical pronunciation. Dan Sent from my iPhone On 31.10.2012, at 19:22, Michael Everson wrote: > On 31 Oct 2012, at 17:59, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > >> I don't think it's ideal to have two spelling of what is essentially the same ending, pronounced the same. There's a wide consensus to spell this <-ek>, I think that's what we ought to do. > > We have a rule about plural formation and the singular. If the plural is in -egyon, the singular ends in -ek. If the plural ends in -ogyon, the singular ends in -ak. > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Spellyans mailing list > Spellyans at kernowek.net > http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net From everson at evertype.com Wed Oct 31 19:56:51 2012 From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 19:56:51 +0000 Subject: [Spellyans] horseman In-Reply-To: <0BE171B4-5F2A-442E-9E06-D7F338C71E87@ryan-prohaska.com> References: <5A030F10-4F14-43E4-A148-FF244DFABC6C@gmail.com> <0BE171B4-5F2A-442E-9E06-D7F338C71E87@ryan-prohaska.com> Message-ID: <22C866BC-6432-46A4-9064-F1A1DD753515@evertype.com> On 31 Oct 2012, at 19:37, Daniel Prohaska wrote: > I know. I just don't think it justfies spelling the same suffix two diffrent ways, which leaves you with two variants of the same word in the singular meaning zhe same thing with an identical pronunciation. No one seems to think the rule is problematic for words with a single plural. If a word has two plurals, then according to the rules, it may have two spellings in the singular. I myself would not use the plural "marhegyon" and so I would not write "marhek". But if I did use it, I would expect the regular rule to be followed, and I would write "marhek". It is simpler to have regular rules here rather than to have an exception. Of course we could write this word marh?k. ;-) Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/