everson at evertype.com
Thu Nov 26 11:25:12 GMT 2009
On 25 Nov 2009, at 18:08, nicholas williams wrote:
> Yes lywyow. Though the form is not attested. And 'colour' is lew in
> ha frutes teke aga lew CW 1051.
> If you spell 'flood' as liv, you will still have lyw 'colour' and
> lyw 'rudder'.
That bothers me a lot less than having all three the same!
The singular for 'flood' may have had both forms [liːv] and [liʊ] (I
like to compare Norwegian kniv [kniːv] and Danish kniv [kniʊ] here,
but as its plural is livyow it really does not make sense to insist on
the latter form since the former is just as authentic. I don't believe
that your preference "lyw/livyow" is really "better" than the regular
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
More information about the Spellyans