[Spellyans] gawas 'to get'

[Michael Everson]

On 8 Sep 2011, at 15:44, Daniel Prohaska wrote:

> I quite like the idea of using <v> where we always find /v/ (eg. an venyn, gav, nev), use /f/ where there is variation or uncertainty (e.g., fos, cafos, fenester) and <ff> where /f/ is unambiguous (e.g. scaffa, affeccyon, offra, scriffa). The letter <f> would then be an ‘umbrella graph’ for words with /v/ ~ /f/.
> Just an idea.

I wager that every learner will say [v] for <v> and [f] for <f> and <ff> in such a scheme. Nobody will say [v] for <v> and <f> and [f] for <ff> only.  

On 8 Sep 2011, at 15:56, Craig Weatherhill wrote:

> I'd be entirely happy with writing "fenten. an venten', just as Late Cornish does.  Also, the s-z mutation.  Nance and many subsequent scholars consistently spoke against writing these, but place-name evidence shows many examples of them.


I quite agree. 

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