[Spellyans] Abbreviating Ordinal Numbers

Michael Everson everson at evertype.com
Wed Mar 25 23:16:50 GMT 2009

On 25 Mar 2009, at 22:54, Eddie Climo wrote:

> If, as I suspect, we only find the 1st of the above sequences, the  
> absence of the others would seem to invalidate the premise that  
> 'nessa' only means 'next' and not 'second'.

Language (in this case semantic domain) is not constrained by that  
kind of logical structure.

> As for the alleged 'spuriousness' of the 'Nancean' legacy, Nance was  
> a fine linguist and lexicographer.

Yes, and he got some things wrong and there's not reason not to  
recognize that and do better.

> We are greatly indebted to him and to the other revivalists of his  
> generation. And if we are able to know more about some areas of the  
> Cornish language that they did, it's largely thanks to our standing  
> on their shoulders.

I'm sure this goes without saying.

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

More information about the Spellyans mailing list