[Spellyans] Excel SWF-KK-Traditional Corpus-WIP

Nicholas Williams njawilliams at gmail.com
Sun Jan 31 20:31:39 GMT 2016


I don’t think sacrifisa is attested.

> On 31 Jan 2016, at 20:28, Harry 'Double-H' Hawkey <bendyfrog at live.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> It has sacrifia(vb.) as well as sacrifisa(also vb.).
> 
> Actually I probably should have been clearer.  By 'glaring errors', I should probably have said, 'within the parameters of the SWF, do these words, produced from a SWF main form wordlist, look like plausible SWF traditional forms, or is my program doing some really weird stuff?'
> 
> I'm sure a lot of the words are just plain wrong, but I'm just trying out robo-conversion to the SWF's not-very-traditional forms here at the moment...
> From: njawilliams at gmail.com
> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 20:02:35 +0000
> To: spellyans at kernowek.net
> Subject: Re: [Spellyans] Excel SWF-KK-Traditional Corpus-WIP
> 
> Why sacrifisa? If this is verb, it should be sacrifia (KS sacryfia):
> 
> eugh sacryfyeugh in scon OM 438
> guren vn alter tek ha da may hyllyn sacryfye OM 1170-71
> gul alter sur da vye ha thotho agan lothnow warnethy sacryfye OM 1174-76
> may hyllyn del goth dybry ha the'n tas sacrefie PC 625-26.
> 
> The use of -y in names of countries is based on iudy in RD and Lyby, Itury in BK.
> -ya, -ea in such case seems equally authentic:
> 
> cappadocia, asia, ha bithinia TH 47
> Ha e Fauge geeth der ol Syrya Kerew
> en Bethalem a Judeah Kerew
> 
> The list includes carpenter, but in view of masons ha karpentorryon OM 2410; the ol an Karpentoryon OM 2422 carpentor, carpentoryon should be allowed.
> 
> The list includes specyly, but ha specyly ree ov tena BM 1509 implies that the word is a disyllable. We write spessly.
> 
> Nicholas
> 
> 
> On 31 Jan 2016, at 19:07, Harry 'Double-H' Hawkey <bendyfrog at live.com <mailto:bendyfrog at live.com>> wrote:
> 
> Anyone care to take a look at my initial attempt at a SWF k/hw to SWF c/wh conversion?  See if you can spot any glaring errors...
> 
> By the way, it converted 'distruksyon' to 'distruxyon' - is that supposed to be correct? Because it certainly doesn't look right to me...what exactly is the rule for ks-->x?  I notice the trad glossary gives the other form, 'distruyans'.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 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: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20160131/8f88f419/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Spellyans mailing list