[Spellyans] in me, in you, etc.

Chris Parkinson brynbow at btinternet.com
Sun Apr 21 09:22:45 IST 2013


Nicholas,

 

I think Dick Gendall would readily agree with you that the paradigm of 'in
me, in you' etc. in 1991's SGMC is not authentic. That is why he changed it
to what stands in Tavas a R.  By the 2007 dictionary the paradigm has a
further change , from 'f' to 'm' in the first person singular. By 1993 he
was using Tregear and SA, and including many vocabulary items from the
homilies in his dictionaries. He may well have missed your useful example of
'in an sy' so thank you for that. I don't think you could argue that 'ita
ve' is a wholesale invention itself. It occurs in 

Lesson 37 of Tavas a R., which deals with imperatives. 'Trustio ita ve is on
the list of examples of imperatives taken from LC literature. 

 

Chris

From: Spellyans [mailto:spellyans-bounces at kernowek.net] On Behalf Of
Nicholas Williams
Sent: 18 April 2013 11:23
To: Standard Cornish discussion list
Subject: [Spellyans] in me, in you, etc.

 

In his Student's Grammar of Modern Cornish (1991) Gendall gives the paradigm
of the preposition pronouns 'in me, in you' etc. as follows:

 

ettam

ettas

etten/eta/ena

ette

etton

etto

ettanz/ et angy (GMC: 107).

 

Later in the book however he cites the attested forms as follows:

 

unnaf, ynnaf

ynnos, unas sche

itna, it an, ydn, etten, eta, ena, unna, ynna

unhy, ynny, yny unny

ynnon

--

ettanz, ittaqnz, ettans, ynna, unna (GMC 160).

 

This second list is similar to the paradigm he gives in Tavaz a Ragadazow:

 

unnaf

unnos, unnas she

etten, itan, ena, eta, itna

unny,

innonn, innan nye

inno

ittans, ettans, unna (Ragadazow 123).

 

It should be noticed, however, that if Gendall had gone back in time a
little, he would have found: fatla vgy faith an tasow coth a vam egglys in
an sy 'that the faith of the ancient fathers of Mother Church is in them' SA
59a, i.e. inans y, and this would have supplemented his third person plural
forms. Indeed inansy in SA looks as though it might have been pronounced in
anjy. 

 

In the lessons in Ragadazow Gendall uses, for example, ita ve for 'in me',
e.g. Trustio ita ve (Ragadazow 58b).

 

The forms of this inflected preposition with -t- are attested only the the
3rd person singular and plural. There is no evidence that -t-forms ever
occurred in either the first or the second person in Cornish. 

 

Jenner in the Handbook gives:

 

ennov, idnov, ettov

ennos, idnos, ettos

enno, idno, etto

enni, idni, etti,

ennon, idnon, etton

ennough, idnough, ettough

ennans, idnans, ettans.

 

Possibly Gendall was encouraged by Jenner's paradigm to teach such
unattested forms as *ettov 'in me', *ettos 'in you', *etton 'in us', etc.

The great merit of RLC, however, was its claimed authenticity. I wonder
whether *ettov, *ettos, *etton can really be considered authentic.

 

One could argue that forms like *ita ve are wholesale inventions.

 

 

Nicholas

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20130421/25605376/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Spellyans mailing list