[Spellyans] ha versus hag

Clive Baker clive.baker at gmail.com
Sat Jul 2 13:37:58 IST 2016


As a teacher Jon, I agree with you entirely, and indeed teach alternatives
that may be seen or heard... my point is that this is currently happening,
and most people follow the rule which is after all an easy basic one,
unlike some other grammatical variations, and why change that rule if it
doesn't really matter that much.
kemereugh wyth
Clive

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Jon Mills <j.mills at email.com> wrote:

> I can see that from a teacher's perspective it is convenient to have a
> nice set of regular grammatical rules to teach. But the learner actually
> needs to be taught Cornish as it used by the entire Cornish language
> community, with all its variants and idiosyncracies, no matter how awkward
> or incovenient that may seem to a teacher.
> Ol an gwella,
> Jon
>
> *Sent:* Friday, July 01, 2016 at 10:15 AM
> *From:* "Clive Baker" <clive.baker at gmail.com>
> *To:* "Standard Cornish discussion list" <spellyans at kernowek.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [Spellyans] ha versus hag
> The problem seems more that for almost the last 100 years, the rule has
> been 'ha' before consonants and 'hag' before vowels' with the one exception
> of 'ha+ an' which is 'ha'n'.
> to try and change it now, whether right or wrong seems to me very
> difficult for such a tiny change....this from a teacher of the lingo
> Clive
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Daniel Prohaska <daniel at ryan-prohaska.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Nothing, Jan!
>> D
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 01 Jul 2016, at 10:19, Janice Lobb <janicelobb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> What's wrong with using <ha> for everything?
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:13 AM, Mike R <mremic01 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Strachan describes it as '*ac* before vowels and the negative particles
>>> *ny*, *na*, and sometimes before other consonants.'
>>>
>>> Here are a few examples from the Four Branches:
>>>
>>> 'Ac ual y byd yn ymwarandaw a llef yr erchwys...'
>>>
>>> Would we treat the u in *ual* as a vowel here? I imagine that it would
>>> have been more of a bilabial at the time, unlike the modern f. *Ac ual*
>>> seems consistent, but it's often just *a* before other words that begin
>>> with u/v.
>>>
>>> 'Y march a gymerth, ac racdaw yd aeth.'
>>>
>>> 'Ac rac diruawr wres, y kyrchwys y bleit a'e yscwyd a'y tharaw gantaw
>>> allan, ac yn y ol ynteu y wreic.'
>>>
>>> But then:
>>>
>>> '...a rac guelet gwr kyuurd a thi yn diuetha pryf mor dielw a hwnnw.'
>>>
>>> 'A Riannon' is used fairly consistently.
>>>
>>> 'Ac nachaf y liw a'y wed a'y ansawd yn atueilaw o'y charyat, hyt nat oed
>>> hawd y adnabot.'
>>>
>>> Is *nachaf* being treating like a negative particle here? I thought it
>>> meant something like 'behold', but maybe it has some obscure origin in a
>>> negative construction.
>>>
>>> So Strachan gives us more information than Evans, but even he doesn't
>>> give us the specifics. It seems that Middle Welsh scribes usually abided by
>>> the rule of using *ac* before a vowel, a negative particle (and by
>>> extension, sometimes *n*), and even sometimes r. We might find even
>>> more examples digging into other texts. Over time, I hope to narrow in on
>>> details like this, but it's a daunting task.
>>>
>>> There is also an instance of the phrase 'a'n kynnadyl yna yn y lle hon'
>>> in the White Book version of PPD, where the Red Book has 'ac an kynnadyl
>>> yna yn y lle hon.' Thomson's edition seems to take *a'n* as the
>>> conjunction *a* with an infixed possessive *'n* (from *an)*, but I
>>> suppose it could just as easily be 'an kynnadyl' with no conjunction. If we
>>> accept Thomson's interpretation, we see two different ways to deal with
>>> *a/ac* in this situation, each taken by a different scribe in order to
>>> write the same sentence.
>>>
>>> Sorry to spend so much time on Welsh matters. I suppose my point is that
>>> the rules for *a(c)* aren't as clear cut as we'd like them to be. But
>>> that's okay. There's enough inconsistency that it's difficult to say that
>>> one way or the other is 'wrong', but we can certainly look to the
>>> tendencies of the texts and try to imitate them. I think you've got the
>>> right idea, Nicholas. I have much more confidence in the Cornish described
>>> in Desky Kernowek than what I see in other books due to the attestations,
>>> and my own preference would be to proscribe rules for revived Cornish based
>>> on the texts. At the same time, if everyone else finds *hag* acceptable
>>> in all environments, I would be willing to go along with that, provided
>>> future grammars make note of the fact that this was not the case prior to
>>> the revival.
>>>
>>> Does vowel length have any influence on the frequency of *ha *vs. *hag*?
>>> Perhaps a diphthong at the beginning of the following 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________ 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/20160702/bb5b1c79/attachment.html>


More information about the Spellyans mailing list