[Spellyans] Truan, buan

Michael Everson everson at evertype.com
Mon Mar 2 13:04:03 GMT 2009

On 2 Mar 2009, at 11:34, Daniel Prohaska wrote:

> “Truan is [truːən] (Nance trūan)
> Buan (unattested, borrowed by Nance) is [byːan]~[biːən]. This  
> rhymes with <bian>! Unless it would be read [biʊən] as <buwan>,  
> <bewan>, <bywan>. But it's not used in RLC, which uses <bewek> and  
> <qwyck>.
> In KS we can write <trûan> and <buan>. <ua> like <ia> is a quasi- 
> diphthong, it seems. Or do we classify it as a proper diphthong?”
> ================
> Michael,
> The regular development would give a diphthong *[ˈtrɪʊən] and  
> *[ˈbɪʊən].

What? One is [uːə] and the other is [iːə]. Both > [iʊə]?

> The former pronunciation is apparently attested in traditional  
> dialect, Gendall mentions it. The /yː/ remains long in hiatus and  
> develops in this position as if it occurred word-finally, thus the  
> du “black”, tu “side” category. So diphthongisation in this  
> position occurred before unrounding.

I'm sure that [iʊə] would > [iwə] pretty easily.

Trûwan and buwan? Trûan and buan? Cf. Duwan.

The RLC homonymy between buan and bian is not a bad reason to avoid  
this unattested word in any case.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com

More information about the Spellyans mailing list