daniel at ryan-prohaska.com
Sat Apr 4 18:13:14 BST 2009
“Why is Dan following George's gaver pl gever (with -ar in the sing.)? And what is the explanation for "gyffres" given "gifras" and "geffraz"? (Certainly there is no need for two f's.)”
I’m not giving gavar, but gaver, you cited it yourself. This is attested in MC. In Lhuyd the -ar means schwa + r. This can be shown as gaver as well. From the SWF’s rule to give the etymological vowel the discussion is irrelevant anyway because it’s an epenthetic vowel anyway, cf. W gafr. Nicholas Boson and Andrew Boorde give gever as the plural which seems to be cognate to W geifr. Gyffras is the plural found in TH, with <ff>. Should we simplify <ff> to <f> if it’s not attested, I wonder? Could it mean /ˈgivrəs/?
From: Michael Everson
Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2009 4:40 PM
Dan's dictionary has:
gaver, pl gever, gyffres
gavar, pl gever, gyfras
gavar, pl. gyfras
gavar, pl. gever, geffraz
Why is Dan following George's gaver pl gever (with -ar in the sing.)?
And what is the explanation for "gyffres" given "gifras" and
"geffraz"? (Certainly there is no need for two f's.)
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Spellyans mailing list
Spellyans at kernowek.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Spellyans