[Spellyans] "Winni-an-Pou"

harry hawkey bendyfrog at live.com
Thu Aug 6 12:24:33 BST 2015

So, 'Winni, an Pou', 'Winni Pou' and (perhaps - I notice a number of Welsh books for children use this method, usually in reference to dogs) 'Winni an Pou' are acceptable, but 'Winni-an-Pou' is not.  

Very good to know, but I still don't know what a Pooh is!

From: njawilliams at gmail.com
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 11:43:33 +0100
To: spellyans at kernowek.net
Subject: Re: [Spellyans] "Winni-an-Pou"

Duw an Tas is indeed attested 30 times (incidentally An Tas Duw is as common). Pilat an Justys occurs once. In both Duw an Tas and Pilat an Justys we must assume that there is an implied comma: Duw, an Tas, Pylat, an Justys to indicate that the second part is in apposition. Parker’s title is Winni-an-Pou, with no apposition. Indeed the hyphens proclaim that the name is to be taken as a single entity. 
Winnie-an-Pou is syntactically comparable with the following collocations in the texts:
Duw an Nev (du an neff x 3; dew an neff x 3); Savyour an Bÿs; pobel an bÿs; tus an bÿs (x 6); tus an pow; mab an Jowl; mab an Pla; rewlor an wlas; pobel an wlas; rychyth an bÿs; pÿth an bÿs; flour an bÿs; cort an mytern; etc., etc. In traditional collocation A+ an + B in almost all cases means the A of the B, B’s A. 
The translator of Winnie-the-Pooh could perhaps have considered at least for a moment that his title was ambiguous and might have decided that it was better to translate as Winni Pou (cf. Mytern Faro, Mytern Arthùr). One might be tempted to think that the translator did not pause at all, because the notion that Winni-an-Pou was ambiguous did not occur to him. 
This blind spot reminds me of *Yowann *an Besydhyer for John the Baptist in the Kesva’s New Testament in Cornish. Traditional Cornish never used Jowan *an *Besydhyor. The attested term is (Sen) Jowan Baptyst: sen iowen baptyst BM 4450; S. Johan baptist TH 8; S Johan baptist TH 39a; Jowan baptist TH 43a. 
Duw an Tas is attested and therefore Winni an Pou is perhaps allowable (though Winni-an-Pou is not). 
The inability of writers of Cornish to understand this simple aspect of Cornish (and indeed Celtic) syntax, has led to such solecisms as Lyver *an Pymp Marthus Seleven for Lyver Pymp Marthus Seleven; *an Eglos Sen Pyran for Eglos Pyran Sans; Steren *an Kolyn Kernow ‘Steren the Cornish Puppy’, (for Steren, an Kolyn a Gernow) and *berdh nowydh an yeth ‘new language bards’ for berdh nowydh a’n yeth or berdh nowydh i’n yeth or berdh nowydh dre apposyans i’n yeth. 

On 6 Aug 2015, at 08:38, harry hawkey <bendyfrog at live.com> wrote:And also, I believe the phrase 'duw an tas' ('God the Father', I assume) occurs at least twenty times in the texts in various spellings.  If I'm correct, surely it must also be okay for 'Wynni an Pou' as well?

Spellyans mailing list
Spellyans at kernowek.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kernowek.net/pipermail/spellyans_kernowek.net/attachments/20150806/04cd8136/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Spellyans mailing list