[Spellyans] Ian Jackson: introduction

Janice Lobb janicelobb at gmail.com
Tue Dec 22 15:46:52 GMT 2015


Is there anything that resisted rhotacisation? Do we know why <s> in some
words became <r> (e.g. yth esa to thera) while in others it became <j>
(e.g. losowek to lojowek)? Was there some difference in the pronunciation
of s?
Jan

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Nicholas Williams <njawilliams at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I drew attention to rhotacised spellings that predated non-rhotacised
> spellings.
> This was intended as a caveat to Jan’s remark: “shift forward a few
> hundred years”.
> I didn’t speculate about the date of rhotacisation or whether it was
> dialectal or idiolectal.
> There doesn’t seem to be enough evidence to answer either question.
>
> It is likely, however, that -s- continued sometimes to be written, even
> when the writer in question
> rhotacised in his own speech.
>
> Nicholas
>
>
> On 15 Dec 2015, at 13:34, Anthony Hearn <a.d.hearn at blueyonder.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> Nicholas, are you saying that the rhotacising had happened by the late
> 16th century but that spelling remained conservative?  Or that it was
> dialectal or idiosyncratic until it became general?  What are you views on
> this development and its timing?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20151222/d5a70ef5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Spellyans mailing list